Sellers v. McArthur Supply Even though the employer modified plaintiff’s position to allow him to work within his restrictions, the employer considered heavy lifting – which plaintiff was no longer able to do – to be a job requirement. The modified position was not suitable employment for plaintiff.
Smith v. Wake County Government Even though plaintiff presented evidence that his neck and shoulder problems arose from a July 9, 2009 on-the-job incident in which he tried to keep an intruder from escaping, the Industrial Commission could find that this incident did not cause plaintiff’s injuries based on the testimony of plaintiff’s orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Singh.
Rose v. N.C. Department of Correction Plaintiff’s back pain developed several weeks after he fell and injured his knee at work. This time lag does not bar plaintiff’s recovery of workers’ compensation benefits for his back injury.
Clark v. Pepsi Bottling Ventures Plaintiff told his supervisor he was not injured on the job, and where plaintiff was not consistent about the date of the onset of his neck pain. There is competent evidence to support the Industrial Commission’s finding that plaintiff’s assertion that he sustained an on-the-job injury is not credible.
Wallace v. Intelicoat Technologies After she injured her back at her heavy-duty job with defendant, plaintiff found a light-duty, lower-paying job with another employer, and defendant started paying her temporary partial disability benefits. Even though one of plaintiff’s doctors subsequently released her to return to work, defendant violated a consent order when it stopped paying plaintiff temporary partial disability benefits.
Justice v. Variety Wholesalers The parties’ settlement agreement called for defendant to fund a Medicare set-aside for plaintiff in the amount of $104,717.88 with specific dates set for the initial $37,427 deposit and annual payments of $2,403.22; however, the agreement also required defendant to fund the Medicare set-aside at whatever amount required by CMS. When CMS required a Medicare set-aside of $273,373, with an initial deposit of $49,059 plus annual payments of $8,011, defendant was required to revise its initial deposit and annual payment amounts; it was not permitted to wait until plaintiff exceeded the parties’ estimated Medicare set-aside amount.
Rawls v. Yellow Roadway Corp. In an interlocutory opinion, the Industrial Commission said, “The evidence of record is insufficient to determine whether plaintiff was able to work after June 22, 2007.” Thereafter Dr. Ewert examined plaintiff and opined, “I don’t believe [plaintiff is] competitively employable,” and Dr. Manning opined, “The severity of [plaintiff’s] neuropsychological impairment would preclude any form of gainful employment.” After reviewing this new evidence, along with the evidence already in the record, the Commission ruled that plaintiff had been continuously unable to work since Feb. 24, 2005. We are not persuaded by defendants’ argument that the Commission made this ruling based only on the testimonies of Dr. Ewert and Dr. Manning.
Scotchie v. Scotchie Enterprises The decedent was shot and killed by a former employee of the defendant-employer. Since the decedent, as an officer of the defendant-employer, applied for and received a workers’ compensation insurance policy that expressly excluded him and two other officers from coverage, the decedent’s estate was not entitled to death benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act.
Cagle v. Marriott/Guilford College Even though the defendant-employer treated plaintiff’s sexual harassment claim as a workers’ compensation issue and paid her therapy expenses for 17 years, plaintiff’s sexual harassment by her supervisor did not arise out of her employment. Therefore, the Industrial Commission lacks jurisdiction over her claim.
Lingerfelt v. Advance Transportation, Inc. Even though the defendant-administrator’s attempt to cancel the defendant-employer’s workers’ compensation insurance policy on Aug. 31, 2007 was ineffective, the policy ended by its own terms on March 18, 2008. We reject plaintiff’s contention that the policy was automatically renewed. By the time of plaintiff’s June 3, 2008 accident, the employer was uninsured.
