Lewis v. Beachview Exxon Svc.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJanuary 30, 2004
DocketI.C. NO. 744105
StatusPublished

This text of Lewis v. Beachview Exxon Svc. (Lewis v. Beachview Exxon Svc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lewis v. Beachview Exxon Svc., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2004).

Opinions

***********
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Jones and the briefs and arguments of the parties. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence. Accordingly, the Full Commission reverses the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner and enters the following Opinion and Award.

***********
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law, the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing as:

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are bound by and subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. At all relevant times, an employment relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer.

3. Penn National Insurance Company is the carrier on risk.

4. Plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident, a hernia injury, arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant-employer.

5. Plaintiff's medical records were stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit 1-A and 1-B.

6. Industrial Commission forms and filings were stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit 2.

7. The depositions of Ted Kuntsling, M.D., Gregory Scott Pape, M.D., David A. Schwartz, M.D., Joseph McCabe, D.O. and Anita Buck, R.N. were received and admitted into evidence.

8. The issues before the undersigned are: (i) whether plaintiff's current condition is causally related to his compensable injury by accident; (ii) if so, what compensation, if any, is due plaintiff; (iii) whether defendants are estopped from denying plaintiff's pulmonary condition; (iv) whether plaintiff is entitled to attendant care for his current condition; (v) what is plaintiff's average weekly wage; (vi) whether plaintiff is entitled to attorney's fees for defendants' alleged unreasonable defense of this claim.

***********
EVIDENTIARY RULINGS
The objections raised in the deposition of Ted Kunstling, M.D., Gregory Scott Pape, M.D., David A. Schwartz, M.D., Joseph McCabe, D.O., and Anita Buck, are OVERRULED.

***********
The Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the deputy commissioner of this matter, plaintiff was forty-four (44) years old and had not completed high school. Plaintiff is married and has one (1) child. Plaintiff previously served as a machinist in the United States Navy and was employed as an auto mechanic for more than ten (10) years with defendant-employer where his responsibilities included car repair and maintenance, service station attendant and tow truck driver.

2. Plaintiff worked forty (40) hours per week at a rate of $6.50 per hour. Plaintiff also earned between $25.00 to $35.00 each week for two (2) or three (3) wrecker calls.

3. Plaintiff never received a payroll check but was paid by Herbert Kelly, owner of defendant-employer, in cash. Plaintiff's personal records for 1996 and 1997 were destroyed as a result of hurricanes in 1998.

4. Defendant-Carrier initially paid temporary total disability compensation to plaintiff pursuant to a Form 60, which indicated plaintiff's average weekly wage as $260.00, which yielded a weekly compensation rate of $173.34. Subsequently, the Industrial Commission determined plaintiff's average weekly wage based upon the submitted Form 22 to be $180.60, which yielded a compensation rate of $120.41 and defendants began paying this amount in October 2000. However, based upon tax returns submitted by the parties, the Full Commission finds that plaintiff's average weekly wage was $295.00 per week, yielding a compensation rate of $196.67.

5. On September 16, 1997, plaintiff was using a pry bar to change a crankshaft when he felt a pop and severe pain in his abdominal wall.

6. Plaintiff notified Herbert Kelly of this injury and went to Carteret General Hospital where he was diagnosed with a hernia.

7. Plaintiff was referred to Richard Wray, M.D., for hernia surgery. Dr. Wray performed surgery on Friday, September 19, 1997. Plaintiff was released from the hospital the next day, Saturday, September 20, 1997.

8. On Sunday, September 21, 1997, plaintiff developed chest tightness, shortness of breath and wheezing. Plaintiff was taken to Carteret General Hospital and admitted. Plaintiff was diagnosed with pneumococcal pneumonia, the most common type of pneumonia and haemophilus influenza.

9. Plaintiff had asthma during his childhood and adulthood and used Primatene mist for this condition throughout his lifetime.

10. Plaintiff has been smoking for more than thirty years. Plaintiff began smoking at the age of twelve or thirteen and had smoked two packs per day until 1998. Further, plaintiff continued to smoke during 1999. Plaintiff continued to smoke two packs a day from 2000-2001. Plaintiff also admitted that his doctors advised him to stop smoking prior to his surgery in 1997. Plaintiff testified that he quit smoking approximately five weeks prior to the hearing before the deputy commissioner on February 25, 2002.

11. Gregory Scott Pape, M.D. is the Division Chief of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and Assistant Professor at East Carolina School of Medicine and is certified in three specialties, pulmonology, critical care and internal medicine. Dr. Pape evaluated plaintiff on February 15, 2001. Dr. Pape testified that it was likely that plaintiff did have some chronic obstructive lung disease prior to his hernia surgery based on his history of reactive airway disease as a child and his significant smoking history, which also increased plaintiff's risk of acquiring a respiratory infection such as pneumonia.

12. Dr. Pape referred to the guidelines of the American Thoracic Society in determining whether plaintiff acquired this pneumonia in the community or in the hospital. Those guidelines indicate that if the pneumonia develops within the first five days of hospitalization, then the pneumonia is more likely to be a community-acquired pneumonia. Hospital patients' oral pharynx and sometimes stomach can become colonized with gram-negative bacteria. A period of time is required for the colonization of these hospital-acquired pathogens after exposure. If there occurs a subsequent aspiration of oral pharyngeal or gastric secretions, then this can lead to the colonization of pathogens or the development of pneumonia. Consequently, the American Thoracic Society's guidelines conclude that a hospital patient who develops pneumonia within the first five days of hospitalization most likely has a pneumonia developed from community-acquired pathogens. Herein, plaintiff developed pneumonia within one day of being released from the hospital and within two days of the hospitalization; therefore, his pneumonia was more likely acquired in the community rather than the hospital setting.

13. Dr. Pape testified that, contrary to the initial read of the x-ray taken just prior to his hospitalization as showing plaintiff's lungs to be clear, it was possible the x-rays showed very early stages of a developing respiratory infection or pneumonia. Dr. Pape testified that more likely than not plaintiff's subsequent respiratory problems were not related to his hernia surgery. Dr. Pape is of the opinion that plaintiff's respiratory problems resulted from his underlying airway disease and the community-acquired pneumonia. Dr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc.
265 S.E.2d 389 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1980)
Hogan v. Cone Mills Corp.
337 S.E.2d 477 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1985)
Watts v. Hemlock Homes of the Highlands, Inc.
544 S.E.2d 1 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001)
Sims v. Charmes/Arby's Roast Beef
542 S.E.2d 277 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001)
Young v. Hickory Business Furniture
538 S.E.2d 912 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2000)
Mitchell v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.
353 S.E.2d 638 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1987)
Calhoun v. Wayne Dennis Heating & Air Conditioning
501 S.E.2d 346 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lewis v. Beachview Exxon Svc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewis-v-beachview-exxon-svc-ncworkcompcom-2004.