Swilling v. Holland Transfer Company Inc.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedDecember 13, 2007
DocketI.C. NO. 443061.
StatusPublished

This text of Swilling v. Holland Transfer Company Inc. (Swilling v. Holland Transfer Company 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
Swilling v. Holland Transfer Company Inc., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2007).

Opinion

***********
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Stanback and the briefs and arguments of the parties. The appealing party has shown good ground to reconsider the evidence. Accordingly, 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 Industrial Commission has jurisdiction over this case.

2. All parties are subject to and bound by the Workers' Compensation Act. *Page 2

3. On the date of the incident giving rise to this claim, an employer/employee relationship existed between the parties, and AIG Claim Services was the carrier on the risk.

4. Documents stipulated into evidence include the following:

a. Stipulated Exhibit #1 — Industrial Commission Forms and

b. Stipulated Exhibit #2 — Plaintiff's medical records

5. Additional documents admitted into evidence include the following:

a. Plaintiff's Exhibit #1 — W-2 forms from 2003 and earnings report from defendant-employer for 2004;

b. Plaintiff's Exhibit #2 — Dispatch records;

c. Plaintiff's Exhibit #3 — Short-term disability application and chart of payments received and copies of disability checks;

d. Defendants' Exhibit #1 — Medical note from Dr. Schulze from October 2004, with restrictions; and

e. Defendants' Exhibit #3 — Medical note from Dr. Schulze from December 10, 2004.

***********
Based upon all of the competent evidence of record and reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On the date of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was forty years old with a high school diploma and one year of college. He was a 1999 graduate of truck driving school and had worked as a driver off and on since then. His other jobs since graduation from high school involved heavy labor. *Page 3

2. Plaintiff began working as a truck driver for defendant-employer on November 23, 2003. He drove a tractor-trailer delivering goods to various locations in the Carolinas, Virginia and Georgia.

3. For certain customers, plaintiff would have to physically assist in the unloading of products off the truck. Defendant-employer's dispatch logs specifically denoted "driver assists" for particular trips where a driver had to physically assist in the unloading of products. One of defendant-employer's primary customers while plaintiff was employed was American Tire Distributors (hereinafter "American Tire"). Any deliveries to American Tire that required the driver to assist in the unloading were denoted as "driver assists" in the dispatch logs.

4. According to Rick McClure, Dispatch Supervisor and Vice President of Operations for defendant-employer, the company delivered approximately two loads of tires per day to American Tire locations. Drivers did not load tires onto the trucks, but assisted in unloading them at the American Tire locations. The tires were loaded onto the trucks in a fashion known as lacing. The tires were laid down flat, side to side, with one tire laying flat and another tire laying one half over the top, at 45 degree angles, going back and forth until the truck was full. To physically unload the tires at an American Tire location, a driver would lift each individual tire and roll it out of the back end of the truck. The tire was received by an American Tire employee who would stack the individual tires on pallets for addition to the store inventory.

5. Robert Kirkpatrick, general manager of the American Tire location in Columbia, South Carolina for five years, is very familiar and knowledgeable about the size and approximate weights of the tires delivered to his facility. Tires ranging from passenger car tires, medium truck tires, over the road tractor trailer tires and lawn and garden tires are delivered to the Columbia facility. The weights of these tires vary between 20 pounds individually up to 150 *Page 4 pounds individually. Lawn and garden tires typically weigh between 1-2 pounds. Approximately 70% of the tires delivered to his location are automobile tires, with 25% of the tires being truck and off road tires for heavy equipment, and the remaining 5% of the tires being lawn and garden tires.

6. On May 25, 2004, plaintiff drove a truck loaded with tires for delivery to the American Tire facility in Columbia, South Carolina. He arrived at the location at approximately 7:00 a.m. — 7:30 a.m. He began unloading each individual tire by physically lifting and rolling it off the end of the truck to an American Tire representative.

7. Plaintiff continued in this matter until approximately 9:30 a.m. when he allegedly encountered auto/truck tires which were "banded together in sets of two and three tires." Plaintiff testified at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner that the tires were banded with a type of heavy plastic, with four bands around each set of tires. He testified that he encountered approximately 12 sets of two tires banded together and approximately 12 sets of three tires banded together. Plaintiff further testified at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner that he unloaded all of the banded tires on the truck.

8. Plaintiff testified that after lifting and moving groups of banded tires, he felt exhausted and began having severe chest pains. An ambulance was called and plaintiff was taken to an emergency room in Columbia, South Carolina. He was ultimately diagnosed as having had a heart attack and spent several days hospitalized in Columbia, South Carolina.

9. At a pre-hearing deposition, plaintiff testified that on May 25, 2004, he had unloaded approximately three-quarters of the trailer when he encountered banded tires. Contrary to the testimony provided at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff testified at his deposition that he encountered only two sets of two tires banded together and only one set of *Page 5 three tires banded together. Plaintiff further testified that prior to encountering the alleged banded tires, he had begun to feel a little pain but when he had finished unloading the alleged set of three tires banded together the pain became much worse.

10. During his work for defendant-employer, plaintiff had never encountered banded tires before. Mr. Jerome Petteway, a fellow driver with defendant-employer, testified that he had never encountered banded tires when unloading his trailer at American Tire locations. Mr. McClure also testified that he had never heard of or observed banded tires delivered to American Tire. Mr. Kirkpatrick testified that the only time he had observed banded auto/truck tires being delivered to American Tire was by United Parcel Service to save money on freight charges. Mr. Kirkpatrick testified that he had never known of any banded auto/truck tires being delivered by defendant-employer.

11. The dispatch logs maintained by defendant-employer and used to calculate plaintiff's wages indicate that between November 26, 2003 and May 25, 2004, plaintiff had 22 "driver assist" assignments.

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

Related

Madison v. International Paper Co.
598 S.E.2d 196 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2004)
Cody v. Snider Lumber Co.
399 S.E.2d 104 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1991)
Pickrell v. Motor Convoy, Inc.
368 S.E.2d 582 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Swilling v. Holland Transfer Company Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swilling-v-holland-transfer-company-inc-ncworkcompcom-2007.