Boston v. Chesterfield Elem. school/burke County
I.C. NO. 652231.
| N.C. Indus. Comm. | Aug 25, 2011Background
- Plaintiff, age 60, worked for Defendant for ~30 years as a reading assistant and in school office/library; she has a long-standing right-arm paralysis from childhood polio; she and her family provide/assist with daily living activities; August 23, 2006, she injured her left hand/thumb; Defendant accepted the injury as compensable and paid benefits at an initially incorrect rate; a 2010 consent order addressed a $46,828.54 overpayment and set off recovery terms; life care planning determined attendant care needs and assistive devices; the Commission remanded to gather evidence about pre-hearing attendant care and providers.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Attendant care entitlement and duration | Plaintiff seeks attendant care for daily living impairments | Employer disputes scope or duration of attendant care | Entitled to attendant care services and 12 hours/day at $15/hr |
| Necessity of assistive devices | Weiss plan medically necessary for independence | Devices not disputed but not necessary? (not explicit) | Assistive devices identified by Weiss are medically necessary |
| Causation of trigger fingers | Injury contributed to trigger fingers | Trigger fingers not a consequence of the August 23, 2006 injury | Trigger fingers not causally related to the compensable injury |
Key Cases Cited
- Holley v. ACTS, Inc., 357 N.C. 228, 581 S.E.2d 750 (2003) (causation not established for trigger fingers (in context) })
- Ruiz v. Belk Masonry Co., 148 N.C. App. 675, 559 S.E.2d 249 (2002) (attendant care considerations under North Carolina law)
- London v. Snak-Time Catering, 136 N.C. App. 473, 525 S.E.2d 203 (2000) (life care planning and attendant care concepts)