Winkles v. Thorne Industries

North Carolina Industrial Commission

Winkles v. Thorne Industries

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission

DecidedJanuary 3, 1997

DocketI.C. No. 455206

StatusPublished

This text of Winkles v. Thorne Industries (Winkles v. Thorne Industries) 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

Winkles v. Thorne Industries, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

The Commission found in this case that the treating physician's rating of 10% to the hand did not reliably quantify a permanent partial impairment compensable under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-31(12) because, as he stated, but for her scar, he might not have given the plaintiff a rating at all, and therefore, the Commission made an award for disfigurement under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-31(22). However, the opinion erroneously included a finding that the plaintiff did suffer a 10% permanent partial disability to her right hand in paragraph #14.

Consequently, IT IS ORDERED that Finding of Fact #14 is STRICKEN, and that as so amended, the Opinion and Award for the Full Commission remains in force and effect from the date of its filing.

S/ _______________________ J. RANDOLPH WARD COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/ _________________________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

S/ _________________________ COY M. VANCE COMMISSIONER

JRW:md

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

The Commission found in this case that the treating physician's rating of 10% to the hand did not reliably quantify a permanent partial impairment compensable under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-31(12) because, as he stated, but for her scar, he might not have given the plaintiff a rating at all, and therefore, the Commission made an award for disfigurement under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-31(22). However, the opinion erroneously included a finding that the plaintiff did suffer a 10% permanent partial disability to her right hand in paragraph #14.