 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Drakeford v. Charlotte Express6/17/2003
PUBLISHED
Plaintiff Johnnie Drakeford appeals an opinion and award entered 9 October 2001 by the North Carolina Industrial Commission that terminated his temporary total disability benefits. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, who was employed as a driver/trainer for Charlotte Express, was in the course of driving a tractor-trailer when he stopped at a truck stop on 4 May 1995. On his way to the shower, he slipped on the wet floor and fell to the ground. He then felt pain in his neck and lower back. Charlotte Express and Charlotte Express's carrier, National Union Fire c/o Liberty Bell Agency ("defendants"), accepted compensability by paying benefits, without filing Form 21 or Form 60, and have paid plaintiff temporary total disability benefits since the date of the accident. Defendants filed a Form 24 on 6 August 1999, requesting that plaintiff's benefits be terminated on the grounds that plaintiff's current disability is the result of a non-work-related condition and is not caused or in any way related to his work-related injury sustained in May 1995. Special Deputy Commissioner Ronnie E. Rowell held an informal telephone hearing on 9 September 1999, after which he denied defendants' application for termination of benefits. Defendants then requested that the claim be assigned for hearing before the Industrial Commission.
The claim was heard 15 August 2000, and, in an opinion and award filed on 30 November 2000, Deputy Commissioner Pamela T. Young found that plaintiff's current condition was not caused by nor aggravated by the work-related injury of May 1995. The deputy commissioner also found that plaintiff's current medical condition and his disability were caused by a rare neurological disorder called Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy ("CIDP"), which pre-existed plaintiff's injuries that had resulted from the May 1995 fall. Accordingly, the deputy commissioner granted defendants' motion to terminate plaintiff's benefits.
In an opinion and award filed 9 October 2001, the Full Commission affirmed and adopted in whole the deputy commissioner's findings of fact, conclusions of law, and award. Plaintiff now appeals.
BACKGROUND
Below are some of the facts found by the Full Commission:
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was 47 years old and employed as a truck driver by defendant-employer. Plaintiff began working for defendant-employer in 1993.
2. Prior to 4 May 1995, plaintiff had suffered back problems. In 1981, plaintiff reported that he sought medical care for persistent back problems. Again, in 1987, plaintiff suffered a back injury while lifting materials at work. He was taken out of work for a period of nine months, but did not undergo any type of surgical intervention.
3. On 4 May 1995, plaintiff was in the course of driving a tractor trailer for defendant-employer when he stopped at a truck stop. On his way to the shower, plaintiff slipped on the wet floor and fell to the ground. Thereafter, he felt pain in his neck and lower back.
5. Plaintiff complained of neck and back pain after his injury . After plaintiff completed his truck route and returned home, he went to the emergency room at Moore Regional Hospital.
6. On 8 May 1995, plaintiff presented to his local primary care facility complaining of back and neck pain. Dr. Ed Carey examined plaintiff. Dr. Carey diagnosed plaintiff with lumbosacral strain and prescribed anti-inflammatory medication. Initially, plaintiff's condition seemed to improve.
7. Plaintiff was evaluated by Dr. Shupeck on 26 June 1995. Dr. Shupeck diagnosed pla
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 North Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|