Powell v. Marriott Corporation

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMay 27, 1998
DocketI.C. No. 230932
StatusPublished

This text of Powell v. Marriott Corporation (Powell v. Marriott Corporation) 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
Powell v. Marriott Corporation, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1998).

Opinion

The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before former Deputy Commissioner Alston. The sole issue before the Full Commission is whether the Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to allow defendant a credit under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-42. As the appealing parties have not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission modifies and affirms the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner as follows:

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

STIPULATIONS
1. At the time of the injury by accident, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. The employment relationship existed between the employee, Ann Powell, and defendant at that time.

3. The defendant is self-insured.

4. The Plaintiff's average weekly wage was $310.00.

5. The medical records of the Plaintiff as well as the records of Genex, a vocational rehabilitation company, are stipulated into evidence.

6. On 15 June 1992, the North Carolina Industrial Commission approved a Form 21 agreement between the parties, the provisions of which are a part of the record of this case.

***********
The Full Commission modifies and affirms the findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner and finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff is a 46 year old high school graduate who was employed as a cook for Marriott Corporation at the Siecor facility in Hickory, North Carolina, beginning in September 1991.

2. On 10 April 1992, at about 1:00 p.m., plaintiff pulled some meat off of a high shelf, catching it as it fell. Immediately, plaintiff felt a stabbing pain in her low back.

3. Plaintiff was first treated by her family doctor, Baxter Leonard, M.D., who later referred plaintiff to the care of Dr. David M. Jones, a neurosurgeon.

4. Dr. Jones began as plaintiff's treating physician on 30 April 1992, and has continued as plaintiff's treating physician to this date.

5. After evaluation and testing, Dr. Jones found a large herniated disk in plaintiff's low back at level L4-L5 with radiculopathy and profound weakness extending into plaintiff's right lower extremity.

6. On 7 May 1992, Dr. Jones performed a right L4-5 hemilaminectomy and diskectomy with removal of herniated free fragments, a right L4-5 medical facetectomy, and a right L5 foraminotomy. After surgery, plaintiff was referred to physical therapy.

7. Plaintiff remained out of work until September 1992 when she returned to work at Marriott with restricted hours and duties.

8. At the 9 October 1992 visit with Dr. Jones, plaintiff was noted to be working satisfactorily under the restrictions given. Plaintiff was rated at a disability of twenty percent (20%) of the back.

9. On 13 November 1992, plaintiff returned to Dr. Jones with complaints of increased difficulty walking and increasing back and leg discomfort primarily in the left leg. Plaintiff did not want to stop working.

10. Dr. Jones administered as series of tests including x-ray, MRI, myelogram, and post myelogram CT. Dr. Jones recommended surgery based upon a pre-operation diagnosis of L4-L5 recurrent herniated nucleus pulposis with spondylosis and lateral recess stenosis at L4 through S1.

11. Dr. Jones performed a second surgery on plaintiff on 1 January 1993. The surgery entailed the removal of scar tissue around the area of the previous operation, the removal of recurrent disk fragments, decompression and removal of stenosis-type bone formation at L5-S1, and posterior lumbar interbody fusion from L4 through S1 using steel rods and screws and bone grafts obtained from the area of the left iliac crest.

12. Dr. Jones explained the relationship of the second surgery to plaintiff's injury by accident at Marriott and the surgery to help correct the herniated disk caused thereby. The scar tissue and recurrent herniated disk at level L4-5 were directly related to the original injury and the first surgery. The stenosis at level L5-S1 was asymptomatic until after the first surgery. The stenosis became symptomatic because of the settling of the disk space in the level above created by and following the first surgery.

13. Following the second surgery, plaintiff attended physical therapy and work hardening.

14. Plaintiff continued to experience pain as well as numbness and weakness in her back and lower extremities. She began exhibiting symptoms of increasing anxiety and depression.

15. On 17 September 1993, Dr. Jones rated plaintiff's total permanent partial disability to the back at forty-four percent (44%). This rating was comprised of the original twenty percent (20%) rating plus an additional thirty percent (30%) rating of the remaining eighty percent (80%) following the second surgery.

16. Defendant hired a vocational service, Genex, to attempt to locate a limited duty job at the light or sedentary level. After an extensive search process, plaintiff was hired as a kitchen helper and cook on a part-time basis at Two Morrows Restaurant in Burke County. Plaintiff's pay was established at $4.35 per hour for a 20 hour week. Prior to finding this employment, plaintiff had been rejected by several other employers because of her back condition.

17. Mrs. Morrow, co-owner of the restaurant, agreed to allow plaintiff special job duty considerations on lifting, standing and walking.

18. Although Mrs. Morrow recalled that plaintiff worked approximately three (3) days at the restaurant, the Genex progress report of 9 May 1994 indicates plaintiff worked approximately three (3) weeks with diary entries establishing work dates much longer than Mrs. Morrow's recollection.

19. During her trial work period, plaintiff experienced persistent back pain and leg discomfort. In late April, plaintiff discontinued her job at Two Morrows Restaurant pending an evaluation by her doctor.

20. On 24 May 1994, plaintiff was re-examined by Dr. Jones. Dr. Jones indicated that plaintiff was unable to continue the job at the restaurant and was unable to work at any gainful employment due to her functional limitations, chronic pain, and neurological deficits which were compounded by her emotional and psychological problems.

21. At the request of defendant, a second medical opinion was obtained. Plaintiff was seen by Dr. Robert G. Underdahl, an orthopedic surgeon in Winston-Salem. Plaintiff was examined on 23 August 1994. The record reflects that this was the last time, prior to the hearing, that a physical examination of plaintiff was performed.

22. As of August 1994, Dr. Underdahl found objective evidence of continued neurological deficits into both legs down to the feet as well as complete loss of lumbar motion in flexion and extension and lateral bending to either side.

23. In response to questions posed by defendants, Dr. Underdahl opined:

a. The forty-four percent (44%) permanent disability rating of Dr. Jones is reasonable;

b. He had some doubts as to whether complete fusion of the lumbar spine had occurred, raising the possibility of future surgery;

c. Plaintiff could not perform any type of employment due to her inability to sit or stand any length of time and her continuous pain; and

d.

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

Related

Gray v. Carolina Freight Carriers, Inc.
414 S.E.2d 102 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1992)
Moretz v. Richards & Associates, Inc.
327 S.E.2d 290 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Moretz v. Richards & Associates, Inc.
342 S.E.2d 844 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1986)
Benavides v. Summit Structures, Inc.
456 S.E.2d 339 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Powell v. Marriott Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powell-v-marriott-corporation-ncworkcompcom-1998.