Skillin v. Magna Corp./greenes Tree Service, Inc.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedFebruary 8, 2001
DocketI.C. NO. 912314.
StatusPublished

This text of Skillin v. Magna Corp./greenes Tree Service, Inc. (Skillin v. Magna Corp./greenes Tree Service, Inc.) 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
Skillin v. Magna Corp./greenes Tree Service, Inc., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2001).

Opinion

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

The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence. However, upon reconsideration of the evidence, the undersigned reach the same facts and conclusions as those reached by the Deputy Commissioner, with some modifications. Neither party requested the Full Commission to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives. The Full Commission, in their discretion, have determined that there are no good grounds in this case to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, as sufficient convincing evidence exists in the record to support their findings of fact, conclusions of law, and ultimate order.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the Industrial Commission, and the Industrial Commission has jurisdiction over the parties and this claim. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers Compensation Act.

2. On the date of injury by accident giving rise to this claim, decedent was a self-employed independent contractor who was performing tree climbing and other logging services for Greenes Tree Service, Inc.

3. Greenes Tree Service, Inc. leased employees and subcontractors to Magna Corporation.

4. Workers compensation insurance was secured by Greenes Tree Service, Inc. through Magna Corporation. Premium payments in the amount of $80.03 were deducted from decedents weekly paychecks for the purchase of workers compensation insurance through Magna Corporation.

5. Decedents average weekly wages are to be determined from the evidence offered at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner.

6. Plaintiff contends and defendant denies that on or about April 6, 1998, decedent stepped in a hole and experienced an accidental injury to his back arising out of and in the course of his employment.

7. The issues to be determined by the Commission are as follows:

a) Whether decedent sustained an injury by accident while in the course and scope of his employment on or about April 6, 1998.

b) What benefits, if any, plaintiff is entitled to receive.

c) Whether decedents disability is related to any injury he may have sustained on or about April 6, 1998.

d) Whether decedent refused suitable employment offered to him by defendant after he was released to return to light duty.

e) Whether defendant is entitled to a credit for any wages decedent may have earned following his release to return to work.

f) Whether defendant is entitled to a credit for the time decedent was incarcerated.

g) Whether decedent committed fraud in the prosecution of this claim for benefits.

h) Whether plaintiff or defendant is entitled to penalties, sanctions, and/or attorneys fees.

***********
The Full Commission adopts the findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner with some modifications as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Decedent was thirty-three years old at the time of this hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. Decedents death occurred approximately 6 months after this hearing. Decedent obtained his GED after dropping out of school in the seventh grade.

2. Decedent started working for defendant on or about October 27, 1997 as a tree climber and logger. His job involved climbing trees while wearing spiked boots and a utility belt so that he could cut and trim trees. The tools he normally used weighed approximately twenty-five pounds. Decedent normally used a chainsaw to trim or cut the trees. The smaller saw used by decedent weighed approximately twenty-five pounds and the larger saws weighed as much as sixty pounds.

3. Decedent cut the trees while they were standing and after they had fallen. It was easier to cut the trees after they were lying on the ground but decedent would still have to apply pressure to the chainsaw to cut through the tree. After cutting the tree down and sawing it into pieces, decedent and decedents coworkers would chip all the small pieces and block the large pieces, then load this debris onto a truck. In order to do his work, decedent would push, pull, bend, twist and lift. It was not unusual for decedent to lift pieces of wood as heavy as 100 pounds.

4. Defendant provided all kinds of tree services including cutting, removal, trimming, treating, and any other service related to trees. Defendant normally employed between 3 to 5 employees to perform the services offered.

5. Defendant paid decedent at a rate of $12.00 per hour. Decedent and the other employees normally worked a 10-hour day four days per week. Decedent normally earned $384.00 per week for working four days. If decedent worked on Friday or Saturday he was paid $100.00 cash for each day but this was not reflected on the payroll books of defendant. Defendant did not withhold any deductions from decedents pay except for $80.03 per week to cover workers compensation premiums. Decedent was not paid by the job or at a fixed rate for any of the jobs he performed for defendant. Defendant has not provided a Form 22 or any tax statements indicating decedents wages.

6. On or about April 6, 1998, decedent was working on a job site, having being sent there by defendant. As he stepped back from a tree he was cutting, he stepped into a hole and when he did he felt immediate pain in his lower back. Decedent continued to work thinking the pain would go away. Decedent completed the job. The next morning plaintiff told Mr. Greene that he thought he might have injured his lower back the day before when plaintiff stepped into a hole as he was cutting a tree.

7. Decedent continued to work at his normal job until the pain became so severe that he was unable to continue to work. When decedent told Mr. Greene that decedent needed to see a doctor, Mr. Greene told him that if decedent went to see the doctor, decedents workers compensation premiums would increase.

8. Defendant sent decedent to see Dr. John B. Lange. Dr. Lange initially saw decedent on or about May 7, 1998. Decedent told Dr. Lange that he had injured his back when he had stepped into a hole while walking away from a tree he was cutting, and while he was carrying a chainsaw. Decedent told Dr. Lange that his back had progressively gotten worse since then and he did not get any relief from aspirin. Dr. Lange diagnosed decedents condition as a low back strain and gave decedent work restrictions. Dr. Lange evaluated decedent as being able to lift up to twenty-five pounds occasionally with no pulling, pushing, bending, or climbing.

9. Decedents condition continued to worsen and Dr. Lange had an MRI performed. The MRI showed that decedent had a disc herniation with an extruded fragment. When Dr. Lange reviewed the MRI, he changed decedents restrictions to no squatting, climbing, or reaching if he was lifting, no over-the-shoulder work, and no lifting more than five pounds. Dr. Lange evaluated decedent as being able to able to sit for six hours a day, 30 minutes at a time. Dr. Lange referred decedent to the Blue Ridge Bone Joint Clinic.

10. Defendant did not have any light duty work within the restrictions given to decedent. Mr. Greene indicated that he had a job for decedent cleaning and sharpening the chainsaws and other equipment, delivering equipment to work sites, and stump removal. Mr. Greene and Ms. Judy B.

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

Related

Parker v. Union Camp Corp.
422 S.E.2d 585 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Skillin v. Magna Corp./greenes Tree Service, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skillin-v-magna-corpgreenes-tree-service-inc-ncworkcompcom-2001.