Page v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMay 10, 2004
DocketI.C. NOS. 055882 696704
StatusPublished

This text of Page v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill (Page v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill) 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
Page v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2004).

Opinion

***********
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Commissioner Young. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence and amend the Opinion and Award; therefore, the Full Commission MODIFIES and AFFIRMS the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Stephenson.

***********
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties in an executed Pre-Trial Agreement and at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
In the Pre-Trial Agreement, defendant-employer Danka Holdings and employee/plaintiff entered into the following stipulations which were received into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit 1A:

1. Plaintiff's alleged date of injury is April 26, 2000.

2. On that date, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

3. On that date, an employer/employee relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer Danka Holdings (thereafter referred to as Danka).

4. Zurich was the compensation carrier at risk.

5. Judicial Notice may be taken of all Industrial Commission forms on file.

6. Plaintiff's average weekly wage of April 26, 2000 is to be determined.

7. Plaintiff was employed by Danka from February 16, 1998 through November 15, 2000 but was on medical leave of absence from May 17, 2000 to November 15, 2000.

In the Pre-Trial Agreement, defendant-employer UNC-CH and plaintiff-employee entered into the following stipulations admitted into Stipulated Exhibit # 1B:

1. Plaintiff's alleged dates of injury are October 10, 1996 and change of condition since.

2. On October 10, 1996 the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

3. On October 10, 1996 an employee/employer relationship existed between UNC-CH and plaintiff.

4. UNC-CH is self-insured with Key Risk Management Services as the third-party administrator.

5. Judicial Notice is taken of all the Industrial Commission forms on file.

6. Plaintiff's average weekly wage is to be determined. Plaintiff's W-2 was received into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 2. Form 22 was received into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 3. Payroll records were received into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 4. Plaintiff average weekly wage from UNC-CH yields a compensation rate of $351.03 as set forth in a Form 26 from December 1997.

7. Plaintiff's average weekly wage from Danka is to be determined from Stipulated Exhibit Numbers 2, 3, and 4.

8. Judicial Notice was taken of Industrial Commission forms on file, and defendant-UNC-CH agreed to provide and stipulated a Form 28B from May 2000.

9. The depositions of Dr. James Dallis, Dr. George Edwards, Dr. Kerry Jacobson, Dr. Joel Krakauer, and Dr. Scott Sanitate, are a part of the evidentiary record in this case.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was fifty-two (52) years old at the time of the deputy commissioner hearing in this matter. Plaintiff's education includes a high school diploma in 1967, a college degree from Mary Baldwin in 1971, and a Masters in Education degree from the University of Virginia in 1973.

2. Before plaintiff began work with defendant-UNC-CH, plaintiff had taught visually impaired students and worked at the Wake Medical Center Area Health Education Center and Burroughs Wellcome Company.

3. In August 1995, plaintiff began employment as secretary to the Chairman of the Pediatrics Department at UNC-CH, hereinafter "UNC". Plaintiff's job duties included extensive keyboarding and typing, opening up mail, filing, and answering the telephone. Plaintiff had no significant problems with her hands, wrists, or arms prior to her employment with UNC.

4. On October 10, 1996, plaintiff filed a claim for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of her employment. UNC accepted plaintiff's claim as compensable and paid temporary total disability and permanent partial disability benefits and provided medical treatment with numerous physicians.

5. Plaintiff has filed a claim for change of condition pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-47 against UNC which was denied.

6. Plaintiff has also filed a claim against Danka for an alleged injury by accident or occupational disease on April 26, 2000. Danka also denied plaintiff's claim via Form 61 filed on June 27, 2000.

7. Plaintiff sought treatment for upper extremity conditions and then ultimately began treating with Dr. Joel Krakauer on March 20, 1997. At that time, plaintiff presented with complaints of pain in both arms and hands dating back to August of 1996. Dr. Krakauer diagnosed plaintiff with tendonitis and lateral epicondylitis. On October 15, 1997, Dr. Krakauer determined plaintiff had reached maximum medical improvement and assigned an 8% permanent partial disability rating to each upper extremity. UNC paid these ratings and continued paying for plaintiff's medical treatment for her compensable carpal tunnel syndrome through 2000.

8. Plaintiff left employment with UNC on March 21, 1997 and sought employment, which involved less use of her hands, wrists, and arms. Plaintiff began working with Ikon, selling copiers. Plaintiff continued to treat with Dr. Krakauer and Dr. Sanitate while working with Ikon. Although plaintiff's job at Ikon involved some driving which bothered plaintiff's upper extremities, the greater weight of the evidence indicates that plaintiff's employment with Ikon did not significantly aggravate her baseline pain level.

9. On February 16, 1998, plaintiff began working with defendant-employer Danka. Plaintiff's job duties with Danka involved selling copiers and office equipment. Far different from her position at UNC, paperwork and keyboarding were not the largest part of plaintiff's job at Danka. Instead, the biggest part of plaintiff's job was to get out and make contacts in order to sell copiers and fax machines. This position also required plaintiff to prepare proposals and drive to meetings; however, plaintiff drove less than one hour per day.

10. Plaintiff saw Dr. Krakauer on one occasion while working with Danka, October 30, 1998. Plaintiff gave Dr. Krakauer no indication at that time that her employment with Danka was causing any of her upper extremity problems.

11. Plaintiff was subsequently referred to Dr. Scott Sanitate, physiatrist. Dr. Sanitate first saw plaintiff on July 13, 1999 and diagnosed her with upper extremity pain even though he could not find an explanation for her condition. Plaintiff made no complaints to Dr. Sanitate at this visit that her job at Danka was causing her any problems. Dr. Sanitate continued to treat plaintiff for temporary flare-ups of her underlying extremity condition, all of which occurred as a result of activities away from work.

12. Danka issued laptops to its salesmen in April 2000. Plaintiff alleges that on April 26, 2000, she was on the phone with her supervisor, Mr. Cupstid, attempting to get a funnel forecast to work when she experienced pain in her hands and arms.

13. Following the April 26, 2000 incident, plaintiff saw Dr. James Dallis on May 16, 2000 and reported a history of chronic elbow pain.

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

Related

Blair v. American Television & Communications Corp.
477 S.E.2d 190 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1996)
Pratt v. Central Upholstery Co.
115 S.E.2d 27 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
East v. Baby Diaper Services, Inc.
457 S.E.2d 737 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Page v. Univ. of N.C. at Chapel Hill, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/page-v-univ-of-nc-at-chapel-hill-ncworkcompcom-2004.