Lewis v. Tyson Foods

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 10, 1996
DocketI.C. No. 941755
StatusPublished

This text of Lewis v. Tyson Foods (Lewis v. Tyson Foods) 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. Tyson Foods, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1996).

Opinion

The Form 21 and 26 Agreements, having been approved by the Commission, constitute Awards of record and the same are incorporated herein by reference. The parties at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner stipulated to all the medical records of Drs. Bond, Kelly, and Pikula and subsequent to the hearing, they stipulated into evidence a videotape of plaintiff's activities in December 1991.

Upon review of all of the competent and convincing evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good ground to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, or to substantially amend the award, the Full Commission AFFIRMS and ADOPTS from the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner, with minor technical modifications, as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Plaintiff, who is 40 years old and has a tenth grade education, worked for defendant employer as a truck driver from January 1975 through March 20, 1989. Duties of that job involved his driving a truck to various chicken farms where he and a co-employee loaded boxes of eggs which they hauled to hatcheries. Plaintiff was required to lift 35-60 pound boxes of eggs, some of which he stacked over his head by standing on his tip toes. Plaintiff and the co-employee regularly loaded about 670 boxes daily.

2. In 1985 plaintiff experienced some aching and pain in his neck for which he was seen by a chiropractor and by reason of which he missed about 2-3 weeks from work. On December 2, 1988, plaintiff was seen by Dr. Adams for complaints of pain in his neck radiating to his shoulder and with a history of having pulled his neck and upper back while lifting crates of eggs. X-rays at that time established the existence of early degenerative changes between C6-C7 and Dr. Adams prescribed medication and an injection.

3. Plaintiff sustained the admittedly compensable injury by accident giving rise hereto on March 20, 1989, at which time he experienced a sharp burning sensation-like pain in his neck as he lifted a box of eggs from a conveyor belt to stack on the truck.

4. Plaintiff's supervisor subsequently sent him to the company physician, Dr. Bond, under whose care he came on March 21, 1989. X-rays revealed degenerative joint disease at C6-C7 and Dr. Bond thereafter prescribed medications, physical therapy, and traction at home.

5. Plaintiff, who was not satisfied with Dr. Bond's care, requested and received permission from defendants for him to be seen by Dr. Adams for a second opinion which he did on April 25, 1989 with complaints of neck and left shoulder and arm pain. Following examination, Dr. Adams prescribed medication and an injection and advised plaintiff to reduce his lifting and reaching, particularly lifting and reaching overhead or to high levels.

6. Plaintiff, who continued to work for defendant employer following the injury by accident, was next seen by Dr. Adams on May 15, 1989 with complaints of heavy lifting at work causing marked aggravation of his symptoms. Dr. Adams prescribed medication and advised him to reduce his activity and stress on his neck, that lifting above shoulder level would aggravate his degenerative disc disease, and that he should change from that type lifting. When seen by Dr. Bond on June 16, 1989, plaintiff reported that he had been continuing to lift heavy weights and that it had continued to aggravate his neck and shoulders with some radiation into the upper extremities. Additional physical therapy was prescribed.

7. By a Form 21 Agreement which is dated June 29, 1989 and was approved by the Commission on July 24, 1989, defendants admitted liability for the injury by accident of March 20, 1989 and undertook to pay compensation benefits for temporary total disability beginning June 19, 1989. Thereafter, by Commission approved Form 26 Agreements, defendants undertook to pay partial disability compensation beginning October 10, 1989 and then, temporary total disability benefits for a period of one and three-sevenths weeks beginning October 20, 1989.

8. In July 1989 a bone scan performed at Dr. Adams' direction confirmed a degenerative inflammatory process at C6-C7. In August 1989 plaintiff was examined and evaluated by Dr. Kelly on referral from Dr. Bond and a cervical myelogram performed in August revealed no evidence of herniated disc or spinal stenosis. In September 1989, Dr. Kelly advised plaintiff not to engage in heavy manual labor or overhead work and Dr. Bond concurred therewith.

9. On or about October 30, 1989 plaintiff returned to work for defendant employer in a hatchery job which required him to transfer eggs from incubators and dump them into plastic trays which were about as heavy as a box of eggs. He did this job for about one week and because he complained to supervisors about additional neck pain when performing this job, he was transferred to a job on the blood testing crew in the vaccination area where he caught chickens.

10. In order to catch chickens, plaintiff got on his knees on the floor where he crawled around and grabbed chickens by their wings and then lifted them and handed them to co-employees on the line. This work activity was essentially continuous throughout the work shift.

11. Plaintiff thereafter worked as a chicken catcher from about November 7, 1989 through January 31, 1991 except that he was on three weeks lay-off in September and again in October 1990, he did not work in November 1990 during which time he was on vacation and holiday leave, and he was on lay-off from December 7, 1990 until returning to work January 2, 1991. Those layoffs were occasioned by lack of work due to a decline in the number of breeder flocks and attendant services on chickens which had necessitated defendant employer reducing the size of its crews beginning in 1988. After deducting the periods of time that plaintiff did not work in 1990, a period of 14 weeks, there remains a period of 38 and one-seventh weeks during which he earned $10,623.53 or an average weekly wage of $278.51 whereas at the time of the injury by accident, he earned an average weekly wage of $303.85.

12. During the above-referenced time that plaintiff worked as a chicken catcher, he continued to experience cervical problems for which he was seen by Dr. Bond in January 1990 and again in January 1991. In addition, he was seen by Dr. Adams in November and December 1989 and from January through April 1990 and was thereafter next seen by him in January 1991. An MRI performed in May 1990 at Dr. Pikula's direction revealed some herniation of disc material with impingement at the C6-C7 level. In February 1991, plaintiff was again examined and evaluated by Dr. Kelly who rated him as having five percent permanent partial disability of the cervical spine.

13. Plaintiff came under the care of Jeffrey Aita, D.C., in December 1990 and was thereafter treated through November 1991 during which time he complained of neck pain and upper back pain on almost every visit. Chiropractor Aita rated plaintiff as having 20 percent permanent partial impairment of the cervical spine. Plaintiff did not seek defendants' authorization to be treated by Chiropractor Aita and he first sought Commission approval thereof at the time of the hearing on February 24, 1993. Plaintiff did not seek Commission approval within a reasonable time after his selection of Chiropractor Aita to render treatment.

14. Because of a continuing reduction in defendant employer's business, plaintiff was permanently laid off on January 31, 1991. Evidence to the contrary is not accepted as credible or convincing.

15. Plaintiff thereafter drew unemployment benefits at the rate of $180.00 per week from February 1, 1991 to May 27, 1991.

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

Related

Schofield v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
264 S.E.2d 56 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lewis v. Tyson Foods, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewis-v-tyson-foods-ncworkcompcom-1996.