Wright v. Sears Roebuck Company

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedNovember 27, 1995
DocketI.C. No. 800548
StatusPublished

This text of Wright v. Sears Roebuck Company (Wright v. Sears Roebuck Company) 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
Wright v. Sears Roebuck Company, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1995).

Opinion

The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Lorrie L. Dollar. The appealing party has not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award, except with the modification of Findings of Fact Nos. 29 and 30, and Conclusions of Law No. 3 and Award No. 4.

* * * * * * * * * * *

The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing as:

STIPULATIONS

1. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act, and the employment relationship existed between the parties at all relevant times.

2. Allstate Insurance Company was the insurance carrier on the risk.

3. On November 19, 1987, the plaintiff sustained an admittedly compensable injury when he fell a distance of approximately ten feet from a scaffold, landing on both wrists on the floor of the warehouse.

4. As a result of the admittedly compensable injury, the parties entered into a Form 21 Agreement for compensation, pursuant to which plaintiff's average weekly wage was established as $526.00, yielding a compensation rate of $308.00.

5. At the hearing, the parties stipulated a videotape, marked as defendant's exhibit 14, and 310 pages of medical, vocational, and rehabilitation reports into evidence.

6. On February 18, 1994, a Form 24 Request to Stop Compensation was approved by the Commission; and no benefits were paid beyond that time.

7. The issues for determination are:

a. Whether plaintiff was working on December 1, 1993?;

b. Whether plaintiff is entitled to compensation from the date of the approval of the Form 24?;

c. Whether plaintiff is entitled to future medical care?; and

d. Whether plaintiff is entitled to have his attorney's fees paid directly by defendants?

The Full Commission adopts the findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner and finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At the time of the hearing, the plaintiff was a 60-year-old right-hand dominant male who had attended school through the tenth grade. At age 50, the plaintiff obtained his G.E.D. The plaintiff had a history of high blood pressure and cholesterol.

2. The plaintiff began working for defendant-employer in 1952, and continued to work for Sears for 39 years in a job which required heavy manual labor.

3. On November 19, 1987, the plaintiff sustained an admittedly compensable injury when he fell approximately ten feet to the floor of the warehouse, landing on both wrists and his right knee. As a result of the impact, a permanent dental bridge was knocked out of plaintiff's mouth.

4. As a result of the fall, plaintiff suffered bilateral displaced fractures of his wrists, for which he was treated by Dr. Maultsby. Initially, Dr. Maultsby performed surgery on each of plaintiff's wrists to correct the Ace Colles fractures by use of external fixation devices. Due to continued complaints of pain, the plaintiff was referred to Dr. Gary Kuzma, an orthopedic surgeon with a subspecialty in hand surgery.

5. The plaintiff returned to light duty work for brief periods of time up until April 17, 1991, which was his last day of work with Sears. Temporary partial disability compensation was paid for those periods of time, pursuant to Form 26 Supplemental Agreements, as previously cited herein. Plaintiff's job with Sears is no longer available due to closure of the warehouse.

6. From 1988 when he assumed treatment of plaintiff, Dr. Kuzma performed surgery to release the right carpal canal and Guyon's canal, left carpal tunnel release of the ulnar nerve, and left carpal canal release on Guyon's canal. On November 17, 1988, Dr. Kuzma operated to correct the malunion of the Colles fracture of the left wrist, performing an oesteotomy with iliac crest graft to form internal fixation of the left radius.

7. In 1989, Dr. Kuzma performed surgery on the left ulna, and in 1990, the plate and screws from the internal fixation had to be removed. Subsequently, exploratory surgery was performed on the right ulnar digital nerve. On November 30, 1990, plaintiff underwent left wrist reconstruction surgery using the extensor carpi ulnaris.

8. On April 25, 1991, Dr. Kuzma performed surgery to stabilize the extensor carpi ulnaris by transfer of the pronator quadratus muscle from the side of the ulna to the space between the ulna and radius, in an effort to minimize the pain plaintiff has continued to experience in the left arm.

9. Following the multiple surgeries, plaintiff has received physical therapy at the Maultsby Clinic, Triad Rehabilitation Therapy, and the Hand Clinic.

10. The plaintiff has been prescribed an interosseous splint for the left wrist by Dr. Kuzma. This medical device has a projected useful life of approximately two years, and Dr. Kuzma has opined that it will need to be replaced in order to provide plaintiff with some relief from his left arm pain as it aids to reduce some of the pain experienced by plaintiff due to impingement of the radius on the ulna.

11. Dr. Kuzma has suggested surgery to fuse the radius and ulna in the left arm. However, due to the severe and dystrophic pain plaintiff has experienced, Dr. Kuzma has indicated that this surgery will increase the plaintiff's permanent impairment rating, as the fusion would eliminate plaintiff's ability to rotate the palm up or down.

12. On January 22, 1992, Dr. Kuzma rated the plaintiff as having a 50 percent permanent impairment to the left arm, due to loss of mobility and strength, entrance into the joint, and instability of the radius and ulna. The right arm was rated with a 30 percent permanent partial impairment due to loss of mobility, grip strength and sensation.

13. A functional capacity evaluation on January 12, 1992, indicated plaintiff capable of sedentary work. Dr. Kuzma has further restricted plaintiff to lifting not more than ten pounds on an occasional basis.

14. Dr. Kuzma has expressed the opinion that plaintiff is capable of driving a vehicle, raising a car hood, opening a car door, raising his hands above his head, having sufficient grip strength to manipulate jumper cables, and playing Nintendo video games.

15. The plaintiff can read and write, and is able to drive a car short distances.

16. On August 4, 1992, Dr. Maultsby performed arthroscopic surgery on plaintiff's right knee.

17. Since April 17, 1991, the plaintiff has not been engaged in any employment.

18. In December of 1992, defendant retained American Rehabilitation to provide vocational assistance to the plaintiff. Ann Welch, a vocational counselor, was assigned to plaintiff's case.

19. Since the work-related injury, plaintiff has developed arthritis in both wrists. In addition, he has experienced a narrowing of the spinal canal at the C4-5 level.

20. Correspondence between plaintiff's counsel and vocational counselor, Ann Welch, ensued in December of 1992. Plaintiff's counsel requested that Ms.

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

Related

§ 97-88
North Carolina § 97-88

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Wright v. Sears Roebuck Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-sears-roebuck-company-ncworkcompcom-1995.