Waitley v. Cape Fear Valley Medical Center

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJuly 16, 1998
DocketI.C. NO. 551251
StatusPublished

This text of Waitley v. Cape Fear Valley Medical Center (Waitley v. Cape Fear Valley Medical Center) 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
Waitley v. Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1998).

Opinion

Upon review of all of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, or amend the award, except for minor modifications, the Full Commission AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner as follows:

***********
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. 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. At the time of plaintiff's compensable accident on 3 May 1995, an employment relationship existed between the plaintiff-employee and the defendant-employer.

3. On 3 May 1995 plaintiff's average weekly wage yielded a stipulated compensation rate of $178.68.

4. It is stipulated plaintiff suffered a compensable injury by accident on 3 May 1995. Defendant paid temporary total disability benefits to the plaintiff from 15 June 1995 through 29 August 1996.

5. The defendant is self-insured with Alexsis Risk Management Services, Incorporated as the claims administrator.

6. All parties have been correctly designated and there is no question as to misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties.

7. Plaintiff's medical records regarding this claim are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #2.

8. Plaintiff's answers to defendant's interrogatories are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #3.

9. The issues to be determined are whether plaintiff is disabled as a result of her compensable injury on 3 May 1995; and if so, what, if any, benefits is she entitled.

***********
RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
The objections contained within the depositions of Dr. Fleishman, Dr. Mumper, Dr. Myers and Ms. DeBaer are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law and the Opinion and Award in this case. Additionally, the medical records of Dr. Fleishman regarding plaintiff are admitted into evidence.

***********
Based upon all of the competent evidence from the record herein, the Full Commission adopts the findings of fact by the Deputy Commissioner with minor modifications as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On 3 May 1995 plaintiff was a 42 year old female employed by defendant as a Unit Secretary in the Mental Health Department.

2. On 3 May 1995 plaintiff sustained a compensable injury to her back when she assisted other hospital employees lift and restrain a patient.

3. As a result of this compensable injury plaintiff suffered a disc herniation at L1-2 and underwent a right L1 laminectomy and excision of disc with a free fragment post operatively performed by Dr. Carol Wadon on 7 August 1995.

4. Plaintiff eventually reached maximum medical improvement with respect to her back on 20 February 1996. Dr. Wadon placed plaintiff under permanent restrictions of no bending, no lifting, pushing or pulling over ten (10) pounds, and changing positions frequently. Dr. Wadon gave plaintiff a ten percent (10%), permanent partial impairment rating to her back.

5. Plaintiff began treatment on 30 April 1996 with Dr. Allen Mumper, an expert in psychology and psychological counseling. Plaintiff was referred to Dr. Mumper from Linda Braswell, an employee assistance program counselor at defendant-employer, due to depression, anxiety and panic attacks. Additionally, plaintiff was overdependent on pain medications such as Darvocet and Valium. Plaintiff's diagnosis was major depression and anxiety.

6. Dr. Mumper referred plaintiff to Dr. Susan Myers, a board certified psychiatrist, for treatment. Dr. Myers tried regulating plaintiff's depression and anxiety with various different medications, such as Valium, Prozac, Zoloft, Wellbutrin and Serzone. Plaintiff was already on Valium and Buspar (for anxiety) from her treating physicians, Dr. Henley and Dr. Wadon, prior to seeing Dr. Myers.

7. Although plaintiff had experienced depression and anxiety previously in 1985, and received treatment then from Dr. Fleishman, she was able to continuously work up until the date of her compensable injury on 3 May 1995.

8. Plaintiff's depression and anxiety problems in 1996 are causally related to plaintiff's compensable injury on 3 May 1995. Plaintiff's depression began after her back surgery and increased when she realized the physical limitations she had, as well as self-esteem problems from being unable to find a suitable job. Plaintiff's back pain improved, but her depression and anxiety, as a result of the back injury, increased.

9. Defendant provided vocational rehabilitation assistance to the plaintiff, beginning April, 1996. Ms. DeBaer, a vocational rehabilitation counselor, assisted plaintiff at that time. Plaintiff participated in a Job Club two or three days a week with Ms. DeBaer to assist finding a position. Plaintiff was somewhat selective in the type of position she wanted and would appear less motivated if the position did not meet her stringent requirements. Plaintiff desired a job as unit secretary at defendant-employer, and the defendant and Ms. DeBaer worked toward that goal.

10. In August, 1996, after numerous interviews with defendant, Ms. DeBaer found a position for plaintiff at defendant-employer. This position was a unit secretary in the surgical unit of the hospital. Because things moved so quickly between learning of the job, plaintiff's interview and starting date, the actual position was not cleared through plaintiff's treating physician prior to plaintiff starting the job on 26 August 1996.

11. Although Ms. DeBaer was aware plaintiff was receiving therapy and medication from Dr. Mumper and Dr. Myers, she did not clear the surgical unit secretary position through them to make sure plaintiff was psychologically able to perform the position.

12. Plaintiff began the position of unit secretary in the surgical department of the defendant on 26 August 1996. Plaintiff worked only two and one-half days. On 29 August 1996, plaintiff called Dr. Myers in a panic because she was unable to cope with the pressures of the position. Additionally, plaintiff took more than the prescribed amounts of medication. On 29 August 1996, plaintiff consumed six (6) Darvocet, two (2) Wellbutrin and five to six (5-6) Valium in order to go to work.

13. The position of surgical unit secretary at defendant-employer was not what plaintiff expected on 26 August 1996. The work was very fast paced. The secretary had to immediately and accurately respond when doctors called for treatment orders.

14. Plaintiff reported to her supervisor at the hospital, Ms. Harrison, that she did not think she could emotionally handle the position. Plaintiff also told Ms. Pat Piner, defendant's worker's compensation specialist, that she could not do the job and it was more work than she had expected.

15. Defendant filed an Industrial Commission Form 28T on 9 September 1996 noting plaintiff's return to work on 29 August 1996 at reduced wages of $184.08 per week. The form further noted the termination of temporary total disability compensation, effective 29 August 1996, and plaintiff's entitlement to temporary partial disability benefits.

16.

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
§ 97-88
North Carolina § 97-88

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Waitley v. Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waitley-v-cape-fear-valley-medical-center-ncworkcompcom-1998.