Wynn v. United Health Services/Two Rivers Health-Trent Campus, 214 N.C. App. 69

Wynn, a 1975-born CNA, sustained a compensable left knee injury on August 1, 2008 and was restricted from kneeling, squatting, or lifting over 40 pounds.
Defendant Two Rivers offered a temporary light-duty CNA position at $6.50/hour (39% less than Wynn's pre-injury wage) with shifts incompatible with Wynn's childcare needs.
Wynn accepted the light-duty role for a brief period but was terminated after signaling she could not work the day shifts due to childcare, and she subsequently began a data-entry job with Jackson Hewitt at $8.50/hour.
As of the March 18, 2009 deputy commissioner hearing, Wynn had not reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) and remained under Dr. Wertman's restrictions.
Industrial Commission ruled Wynn entitled to medical and disability benefits; the Commission affirmed with findings that the light-duty job was not suitable, and Wynn's refusal was reasonable; defendants appealed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the Commission properly applied the suitable employment standard and related findings, and that Wynn did not unjustifiably refuse suitable employment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the light-duty CNA was suitable employment pre-MMI	Wynn argues the proffered job was unsuitable due to lower pay, temporary status, and make-work nature.	Two Rivers contends a pre-MMI standard should not mirror post-MMI standards and the job could be considered suitable given restrictions.	Commission properly found light-duty not suitable; no error by applying standard for pre-MMI.
Whether Wynn's rejection of the light-duty job was justified	Wynn asserts the job was make-work and not available in the open market, justifying refusal.	Two Rivers argues the pre-MMI standard would still permit a finding of refusal of suitable employment.	Court agrees with Commission: refusal was justified; not a denial of compensation.
Whether Wynn conducted a reasonable search for employment	Wynn reasonably sought work consistent with restrictions after termination.	Two Rivers argues Wynn did not search broadly enough for higher-earning work.	Court affirms Commission's finding of a reasonable search during the relevant period.
Whether evidence supports continuing disability given alternative employment at lower wage	Wynn's new employment at Jackson Hewitt demonstrates ongoing disability shifted to lower earnings.	Two Rivers argues evidence of lower wages rebutts disability or shifts burden to Wynn to show higher earnings were possible.	Court affirms that the defense did not rebut disability; Commission correctly weighed the evidence.

Clark v. Wal-Mart, 360 N.C. 41 (2005) (disability and wage-earning capacity standard)
Hilliard v. Apex Cabinet Co., 305 N.C. 593 (1982) (disability determination framework)
Peoples v. Cone Mills Corp., 316 N.C. 426 (1986) ( Peoples standard for suitability of employment)
Stamey v. Self-Insurance Guar. Ass'n, 131 N.C.App. 662 (1998) (suitability and market availability of positions)
Cross v. Falk Integrated Techs., Inc., 190 N.C.App. 274 (2008) (MMI relevance to disability analysis)
Russos v. Wheaton Indus., 145 N.C.App. 164 (2001) (MMI context and disability definitions)
Bailey v. Western Staff Servs., 151 N.C.App. 356 (2002) (pre-MMI suitability considerations)
Walker v. Lake Rim Lawn & Garden, 155 N.C.App. 709 (2002) (pre- and post-MMI disability considerations)
Foster v. U.S. Airways, Inc., 149 N.C.App. 913 (2002) (disability evaluation and wage considerations)
Knight v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 149 N.C.App. 1 (2002) (MMI and disability framework)