Vallejo-Benitez v. B R Homes and Dev.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedSeptember 30, 2002
DocketI.C. NO. 671044
StatusPublished

This text of Vallejo-Benitez v. B R Homes and Dev. (Vallejo-Benitez v. B R Homes and Dev.) 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
Vallejo-Benitez v. B R Homes and Dev., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

***********
Upon review of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good grounds to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission upon reconsideration of the evidence modifies and affirms the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
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 and in a Pre-Trial Agreement admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #1 as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission and are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. On 16 September 1996 an employment relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer.

3. On 16 September 1996 Builders Mutual Insurance Company was the carrier at risk.

4. Plaintiff sustained a compensable injury arising out of and in the course of his employment on 16 September 1996. The Industrial Commission approved a Form 21 Agreement on 28 January 1997.

5. Four letters are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #2 with two letters dated 17 February 1998, one dated 13 February 1998, and one dated 10 April 1997.

6. Plaintiff's medical records are admitted into evidence.

7. Defendants have provided attendant care for plaintiff at a rate of:

(a) $105.00 per day from 2 May 1997 through 16 February 1998 consisting of $7.00 per hour for fifteen hours per day; and,

(b) $150.00 per day from 17 February 1998 through the present consisting of $7.00 per hour for fifteen hours per day and $5.00 per hour for nine hours per day.

***********
Based upon all of the competent evidence contained in the record, and the reasonable inferences drawn therefore, the Full Commission enters the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On 16 September 1996, plaintiff was a 22 year old male employed by defendant-employer as a laborer. Plaintiff is a native of Mexico and currently has no legal papers to work and live in the United States. Plaintiff does not read or understand English and requires an interpreter to communicate with non-Spanish speaking persons.

2. On 16 September 1996, plaintiff suffered an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment when he fell 40 feet from an elevated bucket while clearing trees.

3. Plaintiff received treatment at Wake Forest Medical Center. As a result of plaintiff's compensable injury, he sustained a right collapsed lung, subarachnoid hemorrhage fractures of the right orbit, multiple bilateral rib fractures and a closed head injury. Plaintiff underwent a fusion and thoracic/lumbar spine Harrington Rod instrumentation on 26 September 1996, a tracheostomy on 2 October 1996 and an application of a halo splint and gastrostomy tube on 3 October 1996.

4. Plaintiff was transferred from Wake Forest Medical Center to Shephard Center in Atlanta, Georgia on 24 October 1996. Plaintiff was eventually weaned off the ventilator and became mobile with a sip and puff wheelchair. Plaintiff exhibited significant cognitive impairments.

5. In December 1996, plaintiff entered Hillhaven Nursing Home and remained there until 2 May 1997 when he was discharged home. While at Hillhaven, plaintiff had to be hospitalized for headaches, urinary tract infections, Grade III sacral ulcer and urosepsis.

6. In May 1997, plaintiff was discharged home to an apartment where he lives with his mother, his sister, Sylvia, and her young son. Plaintiff's family members came from Mexico to North Carolina when plaintiff sustained his injuries. Sylvia is plaintiff's primary caretaker.

7. As a result of plaintiff's compensable injury, he requires attendant care 24 hours per day. From May 1997 to February 1998, defendants paid $7.00 per hour for 15 hours of attendant care per day, seven days per week, by verbal agreement of the parties. Subsequent to February 1998, by agreement between defendant's and plaintiff's former counsel, defendants paid attendant care for 15 hours per day at $7.00 per hour and nine hours per day at $5.00 per hour, seven days per week.

8. In order to make plaintiff's home accessible to plaintiff, defendants paid $10,000.00 for renovations. Additionally, defendants contribute $335.00 per month toward plaintiff's rent, per agreement between the parties. This amount is in addition to the temporary total disability compensation plaintiff receives. Total rent for the apartment is $635.00 per month. Sylvia pays the remaining $300.00 per month. Plaintiff's mother does not contribute to the rent and has only assisted in the payment of utilities for one month.

9. The total money the family and plaintiff currently receives is $64,000.00 per year. This money is paid to Abel Vallejo as Attorney-in-Fact and appears to go into a family pot and used for "family" expenses. This payment arrangement was not ordered by the Commission.

10. Sylvia is not a licensed practical nurse and has received no formal training. Sylvia received instruction on how to care for plaintiff at Shephard Center and additional training on catheter care with Interim Health Care. Sylvia is plaintiff's primary care giver, and plaintiff's mother assists as well. The mother has not received any training in caring for individuals with plaintiff's injuries except instruction from Sylvia.

11. As a quadriplegic, plaintiff is at a greater risk of developing decubitis ulcers due to increased spasticity. It is important that plaintiff take his medication to reduce the risk of ulcers. It is likewise important plaintiff shift his weight in his wheelchair to reduce the risk of decubitus ulcers. Plaintiff has had recurrent urinary tract infections and now has a suprapubic catheter which was inserted right through the abdomen into the bladder.

12. Plaintiff does not want anyone other than family members caring for him, specifically his mother and sister, Sylvia. Sylvia sometimes forgets plaintiff's medications and fails to remind plaintiff to shift his weight every 15 to 30 minutes. Sylvia also does not wish to continue as her brother's primary caretaker for much longer and is in need of respites to avoid burnout. As it is now, Sylvia, who is about 27 years of age, has no life of her own and cannot even spend time with her young son, who is about six years of age. Sylvia is only able to get away from her caretaker duties about twice a week, approximately one hour at a time. During these times, Sylvia goes grocery shopping for the family and picks up medications. Plaintiff has severe cognitive impairment, and his wishes alone cannot dictate his care.

13. The greater weight of the medical evidence is plaintiff is in need of a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) to care for him during his waking hours, an average of 12 hours per day. A CNA is better trained than plaintiff's family. In addition to providing for plaintiff's basic needs, a CNA also knows how to recognize signs of autonomic dysreflexia in spinal cord patients, recognize if plaintiff becomes febrile, etc. A CNA is allowed to administer medications in a home environment under certain circumstances.

14. A CNA cannot coordinate the administration of medication; therefore, a Registered Nurse (RN) or Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) will be required to do this on a regular basis.

15. Plaintiff is in need of the equivalent of a sitter or companion for 12 hours at night while plaintiff is in bed.

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

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Vallejo-Benitez v. B R Homes and Dev., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vallejo-benitez-v-b-r-homes-and-dev-ncworkcompcom-2002.