Ferguson v. Richard Childress Racing Enterprises Where plaintiff’s doctors did not fully understand his medical history and could not speak conclusively to causation, the Industrial Commission did not err in determining that the medical testimony was merely “speculation and conjecture.” We affirm the Commission’s denial of benefits for plaintiff’s back condition.

Tagged with: Medical Testimony

Brown v. TBC Corp. Plaintiff contends that his ankle injury was the direct and natural result of his compensable back injury. His varying accounts of his ankle injury render his testimony about the incident incredible.

Tagged with: Medical Testimony

Briggs v. University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill Dr. Singh testified that, if plaintiff injured his ankle on May 2, 2007 and if the pain from that injury worsened from that date onward, then he believed the May 2, 2007 incident aggravated plaintiff’s preexisting osteochondral defect. Dr. Singh’s testimony was not speculative but contingent. Where the Industrial Commission made unchallenged findings both that plaintiff sustained the May 2, 2007 ankle injury and that plaintiff’s ankle pain “progressively became worse” thereafter, these findings and Dr. Singh’s testimony support the Commission’s conclusion that plaintiff suffered a compensable aggravation of a preexisting condition.

Tagged with: aggravation Causation Medical Testimony Workers’ Compensation

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.

Tagged with: Causation credibility Medical Testimony Workers’ Compensation

Alawar v. Courtyard Marriott North Dr. Shehzad Choudry expressed his opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that plaintiff’s current need for surgery is related to the back injury he suffered while working for the defendant-employer in 2003. Dr. Leonard Nelson also opined that plaintiff’s current condition is a “natural consequence” of his original injury. The fact that the doctors also gave conflicting testimony that lessened their certainty concerning the cause of plaintiff’s current condition goes to the weight of their testimony, but it does not preclude consideration of the testimony altogether.

Tagged with: Back Injury Medical Testimony Workers’ Compensation

Hyatt v. N.C. Department of Correction. Plaintiff's surgeon - before he learned that plaintiff hadn't sought treatment for shoulder pain for more than a year after his at-work fall - testified only that it was "possible" or "plausible" that plaintiff's . . .

Tagged with: Causation Medical Testimony Workers Compensation

Garner v. Capital Area Transit. The plaintiff-bus driver's only medical evidence came from a doctor who relied on plaintiff's version of the collision of two buses, one of which rolled a few feet back and bumped plaintiff's stationary bus. Plaintiff's version of the accident . . .

Tagged with: Back Injury credibility Industrial Commission Medical Testimony Neck Injury Workers Compensation