Pierce v. Greenville Glass Co.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMarch 20, 2003
DocketI.C. NO. 039227
StatusPublished

This text of Pierce v. Greenville Glass Co. (Pierce v. Greenville Glass Co.) 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
Pierce v. Greenville Glass Co., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2003).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the Deputy Commissioner's Opinion and Award based on the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, and having reviewed the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission hereby affirms the Opinion and Award as modified below.

The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the deputy commissioner hearing and in the Pre-Trial Agreement dated February 28, 2001 as

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission, and the North Carolina Industrial Commission has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter of this action.

2. All parties have been correctly designated, and there is no question as to misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties.

3. In addition to the other stipulations contained herein, the parties stipulate and agree with respect to the following undisputed facts:

a. That on or about March 24, 2000, defendant-employer employed more than three employees, and the parties were bound by and subject to the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. N.C.G.S. § 97-1 et seq.;

b. That on or about March 24, 2000, there existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer an employee/employer relationship;

c. That on or about March 24, 2000, employer provided servicing for workers' compensation insurance coverage to its employees through Crawford Company;

d. That on or about March 24, 2000, plaintiff was employed by employer at an average weekly wage of Six Hundred Forty-two and 50/100 Dollars ($642.50) resulting in a compensation rate of Four Hundred Twenty-eight and 35/100 Dollars ($428.35);

e. That on or about March 24, 2000, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant-employer, said accident resulting in injury to his cervical spine;

f. After the injury by accident of Friday, March 24, 2000, plaintiff returned to work for defendant-employer on Monday, March 27, 2000, and worked through April 20, 2000. Plaintiff also worked for defendant-employer on September 11, 2000 and September 12, 2000;

g. That plaintiff received temporary total disability benefits pursuant to a Form 60 dated May 4, 2000 in a weekly amount of Four Hundred Twenty-eight and 35/100 Dollars ($428.35) from April 22, 2000 until August 25, 2000 as a result of his injury by accident.

4. Documents stipulated into evidence include the following:

a. Stipulated Exhibit #1 Plaintiff's medical records, March 24, 2000 Accident Report, Plaintiff's Recorded Statement;

b. Stipulated Exhibit #2 Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's First Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents to Employee-Plaintiff;

c. Stipulated Exhibit #3 Seven (7) pieces of correspondence from Greenville Glass Company.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the deputy commissioner hearing, plaintiff was sixty years old and had been employed as a glazier by defendant-employer for approximately five years. Plaintiff had been working in the glass business since 1959. He has a seventh grade education and has trouble reading and writing, but he was able to perform these functions to the extent necessary to perform his work duties in the glass business.

2. On or about March 24, 2000, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant-employer when the vehicle owned by defendant-employer in which he was a passenger was struck from behind by another vehicle while stopped in traffic.

3. Sometime following the motor vehicle accident, plaintiff began to experience pain and stiffness in his neck and shoulders and began suffering from headaches. Plaintiff estimated that he started to feel pain about two weeks following the accident. Because he was experiencing neck and shoulder pain, headaches, and numbness in four fingers, plaintiff sought treatment from Robert McCarthy, D.C., of McCarthy Family Chiropractic in Greenville, North Carolina. Dr. McCarthy first examined plaintiff on April 3, 2000, at which time he noted that plaintiff was experiencing neck and upper back pain. Plaintiff was treated by Dr. McCarthy on thirteen occasions between April 3, 2000, and April 24, 2000, and his course of treatment with Dr. McCarthy, plaintiff continued to experience stiffness and pain.

4. Dr. McCarthy took plaintiff out of work on April 19, 2000, for the remainder of the week, and then on April 20, 2000, on a note written on a Greenville Chiropractic form, Dawn Gurganus from Dr. McCarthy's office took plaintiff out of work until further notice.

5. On April 7, 2000, plaintiff presented to Greenville Health Care Center with neck, muscle pain, and headaches and was diagnosed with whiplash muscle pain and muscle tension headache. Plaintiff was treated with Naprelan and Skelaxin and advised to return if his problems were not improved.

6. Plaintiff returned to the Greenville Health Care Center on April 19, 2000, with continued neck and back pain. Plaintiff demonstrated tenderness across the shoulders and the cervical area with rotation and lateral movement. He was diagnosed with trapezius muscle group musculoskeletal pain due to his injury. Plaintiff was continued on Naprelan and advised to avoid lifting, pushing, and pulling more than ten pounds and to avoid bending and stooping.

7. On April 24, 2000, plaintiff was seen in the Emergency Department of Pitt County Memorial Hospital by Jason Hack, M.D., for headaches. Plaintiff demonstrated midline tenderness in the T- and C-spine areas and diminished strength with left upper and lower extremity flexion and extension. Dr. Hack ordered radiographic studies and a neurological consult. The cervical spine x-ray indicated intervertebral disc space narrowing and osseous foraminal narrowing indicating moderately advanced cervical spondylosis.

8. A neurological consult by Arvo Kanna, M.D., was conducted at the Emergency Department on April 24, 2000, due to plaintiff's complaints of numbness in the left side and headaches. Dr. Kanna noted tightness in the upper back and neck and decreased vibration and pinprick sensation. He diagnosed a cervical strain, took plaintiff out of work for 4 weeks, ordered an MRI, prescribed Elavil and Lortab, and recommended follow up in his office. The cervical spine MRI was performed on May 1, 2000 at MRI of Eastern Carolina in Greenville. The study indicated degenerative changes in the cervical spine with C6-C7 disc bulge and spondylotic foraminal encroachment at several cervical levels.

9. Plaintiff was examined by Dr. Kanna at East Carolina Neurology on May 23, 2000. Dr. Kanna noted that plaintiff delayed treatment in the hopes that he would get better. At the time of the examination plaintiff was still experiencing neck pain, headaches, and upper back pain; along with left upper extremity numbness. Dr. Kanna noted that plaintiff had a limited range of motion of his neck with extension and rotation. Dr. Kanna diagnosed a cervical strain and degenerative changes of the cervical spine with possible left cervical radiculopathy. Dr. Kanna's notes indicate that plaintiff's symptoms were initiated by the accident.

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

Related

Sims v. Charmes/Arby's Roast Beef
542 S.E.2d 277 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2001)
Sims v. Charmes/Arby's Roast Beef
550 S.E.2d 782 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Pierce v. Greenville Glass Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-greenville-glass-co-ncworkcompcom-2003.