Mull v. N.C. Dept. of Correction

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedOctober 15, 2002
DocketI.C. NO. TA-16833
StatusPublished

This text of Mull v. N.C. Dept. of Correction (Mull v. N.C. Dept. of Correction) 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
Mull v. N.C. Dept. of Correction, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Decision and Order based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Ledford. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, or amend the Decision and Order.

***********
Based upon the evidence of record, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff is incarcerated in the North Carolina Department of Correction. He is currently housed at the Cleveland County Unit in Shelby, North Carolina.

2. Plaintiff testified that in early December 2000, around December 8, he was wrongly over medicated when he was given twice his dosage of Relafen in the morning, rather than one pill in the a.m. and one in the evening. In plaintiff's affidavit, he named members of the medical staff, including Nurse Garner.

3. In early December 2000, plaintiff had been prescribed Relafen. The greater weight of the evidence does not support his claim that he was given the wrong dosage on or about the morning of December 8, 2000.

4. Even if plaintiff was given twice the dosage of Relafen on a morning in early December 2000, the evidence fails to show that he sustained any injury.

***********
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the Full Commission concludes the following:

CONCLUSION OF LAW
Plaintiff failed to prove that he was injured on or about December 8, 2000 as a result of the negligence of any named employee of defendant. Therefore, plaintiff's claim must be denied pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 143-291 et seq..

***********
Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Full Commission affirms the Order of the Deputy Commissioner and enters the following:

ORDER
1. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT plaintiff's action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

2. Each party shall bear its own costs.

This the 14th day of October 2002.

S/______________________ LAURA KRANIFELD MAVRETIC COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/____________ BUCK LATTIMORE CHAIRMAN

S/_____________ THOMAS J. BOLCH COMMISSIONER

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

Related

§ 143-291
North Carolina § 143-291

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mull v. N.C. Dept. of Correction, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mull-v-nc-dept-of-correction-ncworkcompcom-2002.