Oakes v. Caldwell County Board of Education

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 29, 2006
DocketI.C. NO. 366768
StatusPublished

This text of Oakes v. Caldwell County Board of Education (Oakes v. Caldwell County Board of Education) 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
Oakes v. Caldwell County Board of Education, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2006).

Opinion

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

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

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

2. An employee-employer relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer at the times in question.

3. The carrier on the risk is Key Risk Insurance Company.

4. Plaintiff's average weekly wage is $391.99 per week.

5. Stipulated documents include the Pre-trial Agreement, medical records, Industrial Commission forms, and discovery responses.

6. The issues before the Full Commission are whether plaintiff's carpal tunnel syndrome is compensable either as a result of the compensable injury of September 16, 2003 or as an occupational disease, and whether plaintiff sustained injuries to her right shoulder and neck on September 16, 2003.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was born on September 28, 1972. Other than her work with defendant-employer, plaintiff has been employed in retail sales and as a receptionist. Plaintiff first worked with defendant-employer beginning in 1992, but took some time off to stay home with her children, returning to the school system in 2002.

2. As of September 2003, plaintiff was working both as a bus driver and as a custodian. As a custodian, plaintiff performed floor care for three and a half to four hours per day. She vacuumed and buffed floors, in addition to sweeping, mopping and scrubbing. The buffing machine plaintiff used was a high-speed, propane-powered buffer that moved only in a forward line. The buffing machine did not involve maneuvering with the hands but did require plaintiff to use strength in her shoulders. The brooms plaintiff used were straight-ahead push brooms with swivel heads, which allowed them to go easily under desks. Plaintiff used a commercial mop that weighed six to eight pounds wet and plaintiff also used a "scrubber," which is similar to an automated mop. Plaintiff also used vacuum cleaners. Mitch Foust, head custodian, did most of the buffing and testified that plaintiff buffed approximately one to two hours per week. Plaintiff also performed bathroom work for about one and a half hours per day, which included cleaning toilets, sinks, stalls and mirrors. Outside of her employment with defendant-employer, plaintiff also cleaned and painted apartments owned by her parents.

3. As of September 2003, plaintiff was paid for six hours of work per day, although she often worked additional hours as a volunteer, performing custodial duties. Plaintiff was not paid for the additional hours she worked, although she was given more vacation time. Others, including plaintiff's husband and children, and Mr. Foust's wife and children, also performed volunteer work. Patricia Pennington, principal at plaintiff's school, told plaintiff that she should do less volunteer work.

4. Plaintiff's wrist symptoms began in June 2003 while she was working as a daycare assistant for the school system during the summer months. As a daycare assistant, plaintiff looked after children for approximately six hours per day and cleaned up for 45 minutes to an hour each day. Clean up involved cleaning the entire daycare, including the bathroom outside the classroom. The bathroom consisted of three urinals and three stalls.

5. For approximately four weeks in August and September 2003, Mr. Foust was out of work on medical leave. During this time, plaintiff had somewhat longer hours and did more buffing than normal. Mr. Foust cleaned the floors before his medical leave and plaintiff maintained them while he was out of work.

6. On September 16, 2003, plaintiff and Mr. Foust moved a desk. Plaintiff described the desk as large and very heavy, and estimated that it weighed 150 pounds. Mr. Foust unpacked new desks delivered to the school, was familiar with their weight, and estimated that the desk weighed 55 pounds. Mr. Foust stated that the desk was not heavy, although it was awkward to move. However, the desk plaintiff and Mr. Foust moved was not a new desk, but was an old metal desk with a wood top. The Commission finds that the desk weighed approximately 150 pounds.

7. As plaintiff and Mr. Foust moved the desk, plaintiff dropped it three times due to its weight and the desk fell straight to the ground. Plaintiff stated that she went down with the desk sideways, in a twisting motion and experienced an immediate pain in her low back, neck and right shoulder. Plaintiff and Mr. Foust left the desk where it was and plaintiff went inside to put a can of cold soda on her neck. Ms. Pennington came by the break room and plaintiff told her that she and Mr. Foust had dropped the desk and that she was injured.

8. Defendants filed a Form 63 and accepted as compensable plaintiff's low back injury sustained as a result of the desk moving incident on September 16, 2003. Defendants paid compensation to plaintiff at a rate of $391.99 per week from September 17, 2003 and continuing. Subsequently, defendants denied plaintiff's claim for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and denied that plaintiff sustained a cervical injury as the result of the September 17, 2003 incident.

9. On September 18, 2003, plaintiff was treated at Caldwell Memorial Hospital Emergency Room. Her family doctor, Dr. William Smith, ordered a thoracic and lumbar MRI on October 2, 2003. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff was sent to Dr. John L. dePerczel, a board certified orthopedic surgeon, whom defendants approved as plaintiff's treating physician. On November 17, 2003, Dr. dePerzcel ordered a cervical MRI, which revealed a herniated C5-6 disc. Dr. dePerczel determined that plaintiff also had bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, which was confirmed by a January 23, 2004 nerve conduction study. At his deposition, Dr. dePerczel stated that plaintiff's job duties substantially aggravated her pre-existing bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and that the occupation placed her at an increased risk of developing symptomatic carpal tunnel syndrome. Dr. dePerczel also causally related plaintiff's neck strain to the injury at work, but he did not recommend surgery for the cervical condition. He declined to offer an opinion as to whether the incident of September 16, 2003, caused the bulging disks in plaintiff's neck or the tendonitis in her shoulder.

10. In March 2004, plaintiff saw Dr. Scott McCloskey, a board certified neurosurgeon. Approximately 15 to 20 percent of Dr. McCloskey's practice is devoted to hand problems and 65 to 70 percent is devoted to spine problems. Dr. McCloskey testified that all of plaintiff's diagnoses could be caused or aggravated by trauma, such as a heavy-lifting injury. 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)
Gay v. JP Stevens & Co., Inc.
339 S.E.2d 490 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1986)
Booker v. Duke Medical Center
256 S.E.2d 189 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Oakes v. Caldwell County Board of Education, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oakes-v-caldwell-county-board-of-education-ncworkcompcom-2006.