Stewart v. Durham Public Schools
This text of Stewart v. Durham Public Schools (Stewart v. Durham Public Schools) 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.
Opinion
2. On 2 March 2001, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.
3. On 2 March 2001, an employer-employee relationship existed between the parties.
4. On 2 March 2001, defendant-employer was self-insured for workers' compensation coverage.
5. All parties are properly before the Commission, and the Commission has jurisdiction over this action.
2. On 2 March 2001, the plaintiff was employed with defendant-employer as a substitute teacher. On that date, she asked a female student to stay after class because the student had been disruptive. The student began to leave after the period was over and when the plaintiff approached her, the student turned and shoved her with one hand and pulled out a chair. The plaintiff fell over the chair in front of her.
3. As a direct and proximate result of this incident, the plaintiff sustained a right-sided avulsion fracture of the greater trochanter.
4. The plaintiff was treated by various doctors for her hip fracture and various other problems. The plaintiff was treated by Dr. Suh, Dr. Taylor, Dr. Benjamin and was treated at the emergency room repeatedly.
5. On 2 March 2001, the plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out of and in the course and scope of her employment with defendant-employer.
6. As a direct and proximate result of her compensable injury, the plaintiff sustained an avulsion fracture of the greater trochanter on the right side.
7. Dr. Somers released the plaintiff to return to employment as tolerated as of 22 May 2001.
8. As a direct and proximate result of the plaintiff's compensable injury, the plaintiff was unable to work in the same or any other employment from 2 March 2001 through and including 22 May 2001.
9. The plaintiff has reached maximum medical improvement. There is no evidence that the plaintiff retains any permanent disability as a result of her compensable injury.
10. The plaintiff's Form 22, Wage Chart, was never produced by defendant. A Form 22 was provided by defendant reflecting the wage information of a "similar employee." At oral argument, attorney for defendant was asked why they were not able to produce a Form 22 for plaintiff. Attorney for defendant asserted that records were not kept for substitute teachers.
11. According to the Form 22 submitted by defendant, a similar employee earned $2,531.93 during a school year. Computed over a 10-month school year, this results in an average weekly wage of $58.47. Plaintiff's average weekly wage of $58.47 produces a weekly compensation rate of $38.98.
12. The plaintiff is entitled to all medical treatment intended to effect a cure, reduce her symptoms or lessen her period of disability as long as the same are related to her compensable injury.
13. The plaintiff has failed to prove by the greater weight that she experienced any continuing or permanent disability from her compensable injury following 22 May 2001.
14. Defendant failed to comply with North Carolina Industrial Commission Rules by not providing a Form 22 or any wage information reflecting the plaintiff's earnings.
2. On March 2, 2001, the plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out of and in the course and scope of her employment with defendant-employer when she fell and sustained an avulsion fracture of the greater trochanter on the right side. N.C.G.S. §
3. Plaintiff's average weekly wage at the time of the accident was $58.47, which yields a weekly compensation rate of $38.98. N.C.G.S. §
4. As a direct and proximate result of the plaintiff's compensable injury, the plaintiff was unable to work in the same or any other employment and is entitled to temporary total disability compensation in the amount of $38.98 per week for the period from 2 March 2001 through and including 22 May 2001. N.C.G.S. §
5. The plaintiff has reached maximum medical improvement. There is no evidence that the plaintiff retains any permanent disability as a result of her compensable injury. N.C.G.S. §
6. The plaintiff is entitled to all medical treatment intended to effect a cure, reduce her symptoms or lessen her period of disability as long as the same are related to her compensable injury. N.C.G.S. §
7. The plaintiff has failed to prove by the greater weight that she experienced any continuing disability from her compensable injury following 22 May 2001. N.C.G.S. §
2. Defendant shall provide all medical treatment related to the plaintiff's compensable injury as long as the same is reasonably designed to effect a cure, provide relief or lessen the plaintiff's period of disability.
Defendant shall pay the costs of this appeal.
S/_______________ CHRISTOPHER SCOTT COMMISSIONER
CONCURRING:
S/______________________ LAURA KRANIFELD MAVRETIC COMMISSIONER
S/___________________ BERNADINE S. BALLANCE COMMISSIONER
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Stewart v. Durham Public Schools, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stewart-v-durham-public-schools-ncworkcompcom-2003.