McCray v. Thorne

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 22, 2009
DocketI.C. NOS. 807038 PH-1975.
StatusPublished

This text of McCray v. Thorne (McCray v. Thorne) 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
McCray v. Thorne, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2009).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Rideout and the briefs and arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, *Page 2 receive further evidence or rehear the parties or their representatives. The Full Commission AFFIRMS the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
JOINT MOTION TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE
Plaintiff and defendants System Solutions of Kentucky and Praetorian Insurance Company, and AmFed National Insurance Company who provided workers' compensation insurance coverage to Stanley Thorne d/b/a Southern Conveyor Installation and moved, pursuant to Rule 701(6) of the Workers' Compensation Rules of the North Carolina Industrial Commission for an Order allowing the inclusion of certain additional medical records prepared following Plaintiff's May 11, 2009 evaluation by Dr. Richard Douglas Goldner, on the grounds that such records will be relevant and material to the issues pending before the Full Commission. After consideration of the written and the oral arguments of the parties, the Motion is hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, the medical records prepared following Plaintiff's May 11, 2009 evaluation by Dr. Richard Douglas Goldner shall be attached to the end of the transcript after page 206.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. On 11 October 2007, plaintiff and defendant Stanley Thorne d/b/a Southern Conveyor Installation were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. The defendant System Solutions of Kentucky, Inc. contends that it did not have any employees within the State of North Carolina on October 11, 2007. *Page 3 2. AmFed, the workers' compensation insurance carrier for Southern Conveyor Installation d/b/a Stanley Thorne, denies that the policy it issued to Southern Conveyor Installation d/b/a Stanley Thorne provided coverage to plaintiff.

3. On 11 October 2007, Southern Conveyor Installation was a "subcontractor" of System Solutions of Kentucky, a "principal" or "intermediate contractor" within the meaning of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-19. Praetorian Insurance Company c/o Midwestern Insurance Alliance is the workers' compensation insurance carrier on the risk for System Solutions of Kentucky, Inc.

4. None of the defendants has admitted that plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with Southern Conveyor Installation on 11 October 2007. None of the defendants has admitted that plaintiff was employed by Southern Conveyor Installation on 11 October 2007.

5. Plaintiff last worked for Southern Conveyor Installation on 11 October 2007.

6. Plaintiff's average weekly wage is $868.63 ($8,190.00 divided by 9.4286 weeks), subject to verification by a properly completed Form 22 Wage Chart.

7. Plaintiff returned to work for Kroger on or about 16 December 2007. Plaintiff's average weekly wage in his employment with Kroger should be calculated by the Industrial Commission based upon plaintiff's payroll records.

8. Southern Conveyor Installation has neither admitted nor denied liability for plaintiff's injury. System Solutions of Kentucky, Inc. has denied liability for plaintiff's injury. Defendants have paid plaintiff no medical or disability compensation.

9. The following documentary exhibits, attached hereto, are stipulated into evidence by the parties:

(a) All Industrial Commission forms.

*Page 4

(b) All of plaintiff's medical records.

(c) All of the plaintiff's medical bills.

(d) Letter dated 19 December 2007 from W. Shan Thompson, attorney for AmFed National Insurance Company, an Accord first report of injury, a Notice of Controversion and a copy of the workers' compensation insurance policy issued by AmFed National Insurance Company to Stanley Thorne D/B/A Southern Conveyor Installation.

(e) Plaintiff's wage records from Southern Conveyor Installation and Kroger.

(f) Said defendants' verified discovery responses.

(g) The contract between Southern Conveyor Installation and System Solutions of Kentucky, Inc.

(h) Proof of insurance form of Southern Conveyor Installation.

(i) Letter dated January 29, 2008 from Neal H. Labovitz, attorney for Stanley Thorne d/b/a Southern Conveyor Installers.

(j) Policy binder between Stanley Thorne and AmFed National Insurance Co., etc.

***********
Based upon the competent evidence of record herein, the Full Commission makes the following additional

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Defendants Stanley Thorne and Southern Conveyor Installation received notice or refused to receive notice of the hearing in this claim and elected not to appear or otherwise present any defense to plaintiff's claim for disability and medical compensation. *Page 5 2. Stanley Thorne d/b/a Southern Conveyor Installation (hereinafter Thorne) contracted with System Solutions of Kentucky (hereinafter SSK) to perform conveyor installation work at the new FedEx Ground facility in Research Triangle Park. SSK sublet the contract to Thorne on 5 January 2007. The work on the project commenced in April 2007.

3. At the time SSK and Thorne entered the contract, SSK did not require Thorne to produce a certificate of workers' compensation insurance covering Thorne's employees assigned to the FedEx Ground Project. Subsequently, (and after plaintiff's injury), SSK obtained a certificate of insurance from Thorne that was issued on 30 October 2007.

4. The certificate of insurance did not state that Thorne had complied with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-93. The certificate did not state that Thorne possessed a policy of workers' compensation covering his employees in North Carolina. Likewise, the certificate made no reference to insuring employees assigned to the FedEx Ground project.

5. The certificate of insurance was not issued by an insurance carrier or the Department of Insurance.

6. The policy of workers' compensation insurance for which the certificate of insurance was issued, did not cover plaintiff or any other employee of Thorne in North Carolina. The policy did not comply with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-93 and consequently, the certificate obtained by SSK could not have complied with the requirements of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-19.

7. SSK was an intermediate contractor. On the date of the injury giving rise to this claim, Praetorian Insurance Company insured SSK for workers' compensation.

8. Plaintiff graduated from high school and subsequently received vocational training to become a welder. Plaintiff is a certified welder. He has worked as an industrial welder and as a welder in the construction fields for approximately 17 years. Plaintiff has never *Page 6 been self-employed as a welder.

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

Related

Bondurant v. Estes Express Lines, Inc.
606 S.E.2d 345 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2004)
Withers v. Black
53 S.E.2d 668 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
McCray v. Thorne, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccray-v-thorne-ncworkcompcom-2009.