Murphy-Smith v. Nc Department of Correction

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMay 11, 2011
DocketI.C. NOS. 977761 W12720.
StatusPublished

This text of Murphy-Smith v. Nc Department of Correction (Murphy-Smith v. Nc Department 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
Murphy-Smith v. Nc Department of Correction, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2011).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner and the briefs and arguments of the parties. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to receive further evidence or rehear the parties or their representatives. Following its review, the Full Commission AFFIRMS, with certain modifications, the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are subject to the N.C. Workers' Compensation Act.

2. An employee-employer relationship existed between the named employee and *Page 2 named employer.

3. The named Employer is self-insured, and Corvel is the Third Party Administrator.

4. The Employee sustained an injury to her lumbar spine on or about June 3, 2008, with the exact date to be determined by the Industrial Commission.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff is 37 years old. Plaintiff graduated from high school, enlisted in the United States Army/National Guard, and then later entered the Army Reserve.

2. On May 11, 2004, Plaintiff began working as a correction officer for Defendant. Plaintiff worked the day shift from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., supervising inmates during their incarceration at Pamlico Correctional Institution. Plaintiff testified at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner that she was originally assigned duties in operations, where she worked in the "kitchen, medical, patting down inmates, supervising them while they ate chow." Plaintiff was transferred to the Oriental Housing Unit in September 2007 and worked there until January 2009.

3. On June 3, 2008, Plaintiff was conducting an inmate count when she fell, injuring her back. Plaintiff testified that as she was counting on the second tier of the unit, she slipped and fell onto her handcuffs and pepper spray. Plaintiff stated that Officer Watkins helped her up, that she finished her count, and that within fifteen to twenty minutes Plaintiff informed Sergeant Selby that she needed to go to the doctor.

4. Plaintiff was treated at New Bern Family Practice Center on June 3, 2008. The medical records reflect that Plaintiff was diagnosed with back pain and was written out of work. *Page 3

5. On June 10, 2008, Plaintiff returned to work. As she was putting on her equipment, Plaintiff testified that her back popped and she experienced pain. She notified her supervisor, Ms. McAllister, and returned to New Bern Family Practice for medical attention on June 11, 2008. The medical records reflect that Plaintiff "was doing well until this am" and was diagnosed with lower back pain and bilateral leg radicular symptoms. Plaintiff was taken out of work for three days.

6. The Forms 60 and 63 filed regarding the injury sustained on June 3, 2008, reflect that Plaintiff was being paid weekly compensation pursuant to "NCGS § 143-166.13 et seq salary continuation."

7. Plaintiff was treated by Dr. Marcus A. Hodges, a family practitioner, at New Bern Family Practice. Dr. Hodges testified at his deposition that Plaintiff had a normal MRI, that "pain is a subjective thing," and that Plaintiff's accident could have caused her condition and pain. However, Dr. Hodges could not explain Plaintiff's complaints of numbness and tingling. Dr. Hodges opined that nothing in her MRI indicated she should have continuing problems.

8. Plaintiff was next treated by Dr. Ira M. Hardy, III of Center for Scoliosis Spinal Surgery, PLLC. On July 21, 2008, Plaintiff was seen for lumbar back pain that radiates up and down, and numbness in her feet, hands, and left leg. The diagnosis on July 21, 2008 was lumbar sprain and Plaintiff was taken out of work until the studies ordered by Dr. Hardy were completed.

9. Dr. Hardy next treated Plaintiff on September 12, 2008. The medical record reflects that Plaintiff's bone scan was normal, and that her prior lumbar MRI scan was essentially normal. Dr. Hardy's medical record reflects that Plaintiff sustained a lumbar strain, that *Page 4 operative treatment is not recommended, that Plaintiff will get better with time, and that she may resume her present occupation.

10. Plaintiff was released to return to work in a full duty status following the September 12, 2008 appointment with Dr. Hardy. Plaintiff returned to work for Defendants, "working the housing unit, conducting rounds, pulling yard duty, working the control booth, conducting count." Plaintiff testified that she continued to have pain, that her legs would go numb, and that she experienced swelling after her shifts. Plaintiff testified that as it relates to the June 3, 2008 injury, she did not undergo physical therapy and that her prescribed mediations were Flexeril and Hydrocodone.

11. On February 23, 2009, Plaintiff was required to gather for inventory the personal property of an inmate who requested protective custody. Plaintiff testified that she bagged the personal belongings, and as she pushed the first bag out the cell door, and reached back for the second bag, that she felt a sharp pain in her back. Plaintiff took the bags down three flights of steps and placed them in a buggy. Plaintiff estimated that the bags weighed sixty (60) to seventy (70) pounds.

12. Plaintiff testified that she was the acting-Sergeant for the day, that she went to the Sergeant's office and called Ms. Sharon McCallister, the personnel lady, to inform her of her injury. Plaintiff left work early due to the accident and presented to Express Care at Craven Regional Medical Center (now known as Carolinas East Medical Center).

13. The February 23, 2009 medical record for Craven Regional Medical Center reflects that Plaintiff had a back sprain in June of 2008, was out of work for three months, has been having continued pain, and denies any recent injuries. The medical records further reflect that Plaintiff "may return to work/school 3 days" and restrictions were "light duty." *Page 5

14. Plaintiff returned to work in a light duty capacity and was assigned to work in segregation for her light duty assignment.

15. Defendants filed a Form 61 dated April 20, 2009, and did not accept Plaintiff's February 23, 2009 accident. Plaintiff testified that she utilized her health insurance policy to pay for the medical treatment for her back that was not covered or authorized by the Defendants.

16. Plaintiff was seen on March 9, 2009 by Dr. Alan D. Russakov, a specialist in physical medicine and rehabilitation, of Coastal Physical Medicine Rehabilitation Services. The medical record reflects the June 3, 2008 injury and that Plaintiff returned "to work in September of 2008 with ongoing symptoms which included numbness in her feet and legs, pain in her back." Patient reported an acute exacerbation of her low back pain, with numbness into her left leg on February 23, 2009. Dr. Russakov diagnosed Plaintiff with "mechanical low back pain — which began with an industry injury on June 3, 2008" and Plaintiff was to undergo physical therapy and continue on restricted light duty.

17. On March 30, 2009, Plaintiff again presented to Dr. Russakov and asked to be released from work restrictions.

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

Related

Parsons v. Pantry, Inc.
485 S.E.2d 867 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1997)
Perez v. American Airlines/AMR Corp.
620 S.E.2d 288 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2005)
Perez v. American Airlines/AMR Corp.
634 S.E.2d 887 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Murphy-Smith v. Nc Department of Correction, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-smith-v-nc-department-of-correction-ncworkcompcom-2011.