Busque v. Mid-America Apartment Communities
209 N.C. App. 696
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Busque was injured January 18, 2003, left leg/ankle via a fall at work; medical expenses paid through April 21, 2003 with no remaining restrictions.
- She filed Form 33 on July 18, 2007 asserting RSD/CRPS and depression requiring further treatment; the Commission denied benefits but ordered a second-opinion evaluation funded by defendants.
- Plaintiff had pre-existing right/left leg and foot problems dating back to 1995, including a 1995 left-foot injury and later musculoskeletal issues; RSD was not consistently diagnosed.
- The January 2003 injury was treated as a left ankle strain/sprain/contusion, with no work days missed and Dr. Albright releasing Busque to full duty on April 21, 2003.
- From 2003 to 2007, Busque saw multiple doctors; only Dr. Huh diagnosed RSD/CRPS, but other physicians found no objective RSD signs and Dr. Kerzner opined RSD was not present.
- The Industrial Commission hearings consolidated claims (July 31, 2007); Deputy Commissioner Taylor denied additional benefits in 2009, and the Full Commission affirmed, later ordering a second-opinion evaluation which the court reversed due to statute-based limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Busque has RSD/CRPS causally related to the 2003 injury | Busque argues RSD/CRPS exists and is related | Defendants contend lack of competent evidence of RSD/CRPS | Busque failed to prove RSD/CRPS by a preponderance of the evidence |
| Whether the award of a second opinion was barred by the two-year statute of limitations | Busque contends no time bar | Statute of limitations terminates medical compensation after two years | Statute of limitations bars the award of a second opinion |
| Whether equitable estoppel salvages the time-bar defense | Defendants misled Busque about obtaining treatment | No evidence of promise to authorize further treatment beyond 2003 | Equitable estoppel not established; still bars the relief due to time limits |
Key Cases Cited
- Faison v. Allen Canning Co., 163 N.C.App. 755, 594 S.E.2d 446 (2004) (N.C. App. 2004) (competent-evidence standard; findings conclusive if supported by record)
- Adams v. AVX Corp., 349 N.C. 676, 509 S.E.2d 411 (1998) (N.C. 1998) (appellate review of Commission findings; credibility weighed by Commission)
- Dolbow v. Holland Indus., 64 N.C.App. 695, 308 S.E.2d 335 (1983) (N.C. App. 1983) (Commission may assign greater weight to witnesses; findings binding if supported)
- Ramsey v. S. Indus. Constructors Inc., 178 N.C.App. 25, 630 S.E.2d 681 (2006) (N.C. App. 2006) (de novo review of conclusions of law; two-year statute interpretations)