Patterson v. Spectrum Dyed Yarns

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 12, 2003
DocketI.C. NO. 503864
StatusPublished

This text of Patterson v. Spectrum Dyed Yarns (Patterson v. Spectrum Dyed Yarns) 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
Patterson v. Spectrum Dyed Yarns, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2003).

Opinion

***********
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Hall. 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 the Deputy Commissioner.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. An Employer/employee relationship existed between Plaintiff and Defendants as follows:

Carolina Throwing Company from April 1973 until March 1976.

Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc. from April 1976 until December 1978.

3. Wausau Insurance Company and The Travelers provided workers' compensation coverage for Carolina Throwing Company. Employers Insurance of Wausau provided workers' compensation coverage during Plaintiff's employment with Spectrum Dyed Yarns.

4. The medical records of Dr. Allen Hayes, Dr. Douglas Kelling, Dr. Steven Dikman, Dr. Ralph Christy, Northeast Medical Center and Dr. James Haswell are stipulated into evidence.

5. The following documents are stipulated into evidence:

Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc.'s Answers to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents.

Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc.'s Responses to Plaintiff's Second Request for Production of Documents.

Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc.'s Responses to Plaintiff's Third Request for Production of Documents.

Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc.'s Supplemental Responses to Plaintiff's Third Request for Production of Documents.

Carolina Throwing and Wausau's Answers to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents.

Plaintiff's Answers to Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents.

Plaintiff's Answers to Carolina Throwing Company and Wausau's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents.

Cooper Environmental, Inc.'s survey documents.

Asbestos abatement records.

Social Security Disability file.

Plaintiff's social security earnings records.

6. Plaintiff contends the issues listed herein are the sole issues for determination by the Full Commission in the above captioned matter:

Did the Plaintiff contract the occupational disease asbestosis?

If so, when was the Plaintiff last injuriously exposed to the hazards of asbestos?

What, if any, compensation is the Plaintiff entitled to?

Is Defendant defending this claim without reasonable grounds?

If so, what, if any, compensation for attorney's fees is the Plaintiff entitled to?

Did Defendant, Spectrum Dyed Yarns, commit fraudulent misrepresentations at the initial hearing of this matter?

If so, what, if any, sanctions should be ordered against Defendant, Spectrum Dyed Yarns?

7. The Defendants contend the issues herein are the sole issues for determination by the Full Commission in the above captioned matter:

(a) Whether Plaintiff's claim is barred by the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-57 or N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-58?

(b) Whether Plaintiff's claim is barred by the applicable statute of limitations and repose?

(c) Whether Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to conclude that he has asbestosis?

(d) Whether Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to show that he has had a requisite exposure to asbestos such as to cause asbestosis?

(e) Whether Plaintiff developed an occupational disease in connection with his employment with Carolina Throwing Company?

(f) When was Plaintiff's last injurious exposure to the hazards of asbestos, if any?

(g) Whether Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to conclude that he has any disability and if so, the extent of such disability?

Whether Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to conclude that his claim would be subject to the benefits provided by N.C. Gen. Stat. §97-61, et seq.?

Whether Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to conclude that he has met the prerequisites to establish a jurisdictional claim for an occupational disease under the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-52?

Whether Plaintiff's attempt to apply the provisions of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-61, et seq., is unconstitutional, in violation of the guaranties of equal protection under the law?

What is Plaintiff's correct average weekly wage and compensation rate?

Who was the carrier on the risk at the time of Plaintiff's last injurious exposure, if any?

Whether Defendants are entitled to a credit against any compensation the Commission awards in this case for payments, any allegedly liable third party paid to, or on behalf of, Plaintiff?

8. The January 30, 1997 deposition of Dr. D. Allen Hayes, the February 14, 1997 deposition of Dr. Douglas G. Kelling, and the depositions of Doyle Black, Howard Jones, and Helen Wells are a part of the evidentiary record in this case.

***********
Based upon the evidence of record and the findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner, the Full Commission finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was sixty-eight (68) years old at the time of Deputy Commissioner Hall's hearing in this matter. Plaintiff completed the 10th grade and later received a GED. Plaintiff has also taken some college classes, but has not received any degree.

2. Plaintiff was regularly exposed to asbestos in several earlier employments. From 1954 until 1955, plaintiff was employed as a kiln operator at Lithium Corporation in Bessemer City, North Carolina, where he was exposed to asbestos and asbestos dust on a daily basis. From 1956 through 1959, plaintiff was employed by Guy M. Beatty as a warehouseman. Plaintiff was responsible for loading and unloading trucks and boxcars that contained asbestos and asbestos insulation products. Plaintiff was exposed on a daily basis to large amounts of asbestos fiber and asbestos dust while in that employment.

3. Plaintiff was employed briefly as a life insurance salesman from 1959 to 1960. From 1960 through 1969, with the exception of an eight-month period in 1966, plaintiff was employed as a truck driver. From April 1973 until March 1976, plaintiff was employed as a supervisor in the texturizing department at Carolina Throwing Company in Kings Mountain, North Carolina. From April 1976 until December 1978, plaintiff was employed as a supervisor in the winding department at Spectrum Dyed Yarns. From 1979 to 1983, plaintiff was a manager for MJ Financial with responsibility for managing property not on leases and preparing the property to be leased. From 1983 until 1989, plaintiff was again employed as a truck driver and later as a manager.

4. Plaintiff worked for Carolina Throwing Company from April 1973 until March 1976. The company was a texturizing plant that manufactured polyester yarn. Plaintiff was a third shift supervisor in the texturizing department, which had 50 to 60 machines.

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

Related

Barber v. Babcock & Wilcox Construction Co.
400 S.E.2d 735 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1991)
Honeycutt v. Carolina Asbestos Co.
70 S.E.2d 426 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1952)
Roberts v. Southeastern Magnesia & Asbestos Co.
301 S.E.2d 742 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1983)
Haynes v. . Feldspar Producing Co.
22 S.E.2d 275 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Patterson v. Spectrum Dyed Yarns, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patterson-v-spectrum-dyed-yarns-ncworkcompcom-2003.