Renfro v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJuly 2, 2004
DocketI.C. NO. 183104
StatusPublished

This text of Renfro v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners (Renfro v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners) 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
Renfro v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2004).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Houser. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence. The Full Commission REVERSES the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner and enters the following Opinion and Award.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act at all relevant times.

2. An employee-employer relationship existed between plaintiff and defendants from January 26, 2001 to September 3, 2001, when plaintiff was released by defendants.

3. Plaintiff alleges he sustained a compensable injury to his left wrist on August 7, 2001, while employed by defendants.

4. As of the date of the incident giving rise to this claim, and during the entire period of plaintiff's employment with defendants, Cameron M. Harris Co. was the adjusting service for Legion Insurance Company, which was the carrier on the risk.

5. Pursuant to plaintiff's National Football League (hereafter "NFL") annual contract for the 2001 football season, which encompassed the dates of January 26, 2001 to February 28, 2002 or February 29, 2002, plaintiff was employed with the Carolina Panthers until September 3, 2001, when he was released from the team. Prior to that, plaintiff played with NFL Europe from March to July 2000.

6. The parties stipulated the following exhibits into the evidence of record at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner:

a. Stipulated Exhibit 1 — Pre-trial Agreement

b. Stipulated Exhibit 2 — Exhibits 1-23 (tabbed and marked as one exhibit)

c. Exhibit 25 — plaintiff's 2001 W-2

d. Exhibit 26 — Spartanburg Regional Medical Center Radiology Report

e. Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 — plaintiff's history of events

f. Defendants' Exhibit A — affidavit of Sam Mills, Jr.

7. Additional stipulations were entered into by the parties on August 20, 2003:

a. Plaintiff filed an Injury Grievance proceeding against employer-defendant on September 19, 2001.

b. Plaintiff and employer-defendant settled that Injury Grievance proceeding in November 2002 for $35,294.00.

c. Employer-defendant paid the Injury Grievance settlement of $35,294.00 on November 22, 2002.

d. Plaintiff received payment of the $35,294.00 settlement from employer-defendant.

e. The Settlement and Release document signed by plaintiff on November 12, 2002 and by Marty Hurney for employer-defendant on November 20, 2002, which is attached to the stipulations of August 20, 2003 as Exhibit A, was stipulated into evidence and received by the Full Commission as additional evidence pursuant to the Full Commission's Order dated July 1, 2003.

8. The issues to be determined by the Commission are:

a. By their acceptance, and payment of plaintiff's claim for medical treatment pursuant to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act, whether defendants are prevented from denying the compensability of plaintiff's claim for an injury by accident;

b. On August 7, 2001, whether plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendants;

c. What, if any, disability proximately resulted from plaintiff's wrist injury of August 7, 2001;

d. Whether plaintiff is entitled to receive past and future medical and rehabilitative expense coverage as a result of the injury of August 7, 2001;

e. Whether plaintiff is entitled to prospective or retrospective indemnity compensation from defendants pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 97-31, 97-30, and 97-29;

f. Whether defendants are responsible for the cost of plaintiff's counsel's out-of-state travel to depose treating physician(s) pursuant to Cloutier v. State, 57 N.C. App. 239, 291 S.E.2d 362,disc. rev. denied 306 N.C. 555, 294 S.E.2d 222 (1982); Harvey v.Raleigh Police Dept., 85 N.C. App. 540, 355 S.E.2d 147, disc.rev. denied 320 N.C. 631, 360 S.E.2d 86 (1987);

g. Whether plaintiff is entitled to have his attorney fees taxed against defendants as costs for causing a hearing to come on for one or more of the above-referenced issues without reasonable ground, pursuant to of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-88.1;

h. What was plaintiff's correct average weekly wage;

i. Whether defendants are entitled to credits against any amount of indemnity compensation owed to plaintiff;

j. Whether plaintiff sustained a career-ending injury;

k. What was the basis for plaintiff's termination by defendants; and

l. Whether defendants are entitled to a credit for the amount plaintiff recovered as a result of the Injury Grievance filed against defendants.

***********
RULING ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
The testimony of plaintiff regarding his conversations with Mark Kontz, chief scout for defendants, and Darren Simmons, assistant special teams coach for defendants, and the testimony of Rob Nelson, attorney and sports agent, concerning the reasons plaintiff was hired by the Panthers is admitted into evidence under the doctrine of apparent authority exception to the hearsay rule.

***********
Based upon the competent evidence and stipulations of the parties, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was twenty-five with his date of birth being November 5, 1976. Plaintiff was a professional football player who most recently played for defendants' professional football team, the Carolina Panthers.

2. After graduating from high school, plaintiff attended the University of Texas and graduated from its business school. While at the University of Texas, plaintiff played football as a linebacker and as a deep snapper.

3. After graduating from the University of Texas, plaintiff tried out for the Buffalo Bills NFL Team, but was cut in pre-season. Thereafter, plaintiff was drafted into the World Football League of Europe, which is owned by the NFL. In 2000, plaintiff played for the Rhyne Fire Team, of Dusseldorf, Germany, and had a productive season. Following his return from the NFL Europe, plaintiff did not receive a significant amount of interest from other NFL teams in the United States. Plaintiff's agent contacted all thirty-one NFL teams, and was unable to place plaintiff on an NFL roster. Subsequent to July 2000, plaintiff signed a contract with an XFL team, the Las Vegas Outlaws, which later released plaintiff from its team.

4.

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

Related

Pro-Football, Inc., et.al. v. Jeffrey A. Uhlenhake
558 S.E.2d 571 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 2002)
Harvey v. Raleigh Police Department
355 S.E.2d 147 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1987)
Larramore v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners
540 S.E.2d 768 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2000)
Cloutier v. State
291 S.E.2d 362 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1982)
Searsey v. Perry M. Alexander Construction Co.
239 S.E.2d 847 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1978)
Harvey v. Raleigh Police Dept.
360 S.E.2d 86 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Renfro v. Richardson Sports Ltd. Partners, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/renfro-v-richardson-sports-ltd-partners-ncworkcompcom-2004.