Perkins v. Broughton Hospital

4 Citing cases

  1. Baxter v. Danny Nicholson

    699 S.E.2d 478 (N.C. Ct. App. 2010)

    But, "credibility and weight of . . . testimony [is] for the Commission to decide, not us." Perkins v. Broughton Hospital, 71 N.C. App. 275, 279, 321 S.E.2d 495, 497 (1984) (citing Crawford v. Central Bonded Warehouse, 263 N.C. 826, 140 S.E.2d 548 (1965)). In the production of evidence that an employee is capable of some work, but, after a reasonable effort on his part, has been unsuccessful in obtaining employment, "this Court has approved methods of proof other than medical evidence to show that an employee has lost wage earning capacity, and is therefore, entitled to total disability benefits."

  2. Thompson v. Int'l Paper Co.

    795 S.E.2d 615 (N.C. Ct. App. 2017)

    Click [v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc. ], 300 N.C. [164] at 167, 265 S.E.2d [389] at 391 [ (1980) ]. The state appellate court has also held that "[t]he ordinary person knows, without having to consult a medical expert, when it is necessary to lie down and rest because his or her own body is tired, exhausted, or in pain. ..." Perkins v. Broughton Hosp. , 71 N.C. App. 275, 279, 321 S.E.2d 495, 497 (1984) (cited by Britt v. Gator Woo [Wood ] Inc. , 185 N.C. App. 677, 682, 648 S.E.2d 917, 921 (2007) ). Given the extent of plaintiff's burn injuries, which necessitated approximately two months of in-patient care at the Burn Center, it logically follows that plaintiff continued to require specialized wound care for a period of time following his discharge therefrom and that he did, in fact, receive wound care from his wife who obtained training in how to provide such care from medical professionals at the Burn Center. Based upon a preponderance of the evidence in view of the entire record, and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, the Commission concludes that Dr. Cairns prescribed attendant care for plaintiff by directing the Burn Center's social worker, Ms. Atanesian, to evaluate Ms. Thompson's ability to provide such care in lieu of transferring plaintiff to a long-term care facility.

  3. Britt v. Gator Wood

    185 N.C. App. 677 (N.C. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 28 times
    Concluding that plaintiff could still be disabled under second or third prong of Russell test despite being released to work without restrictions

    By 31 May 2002-several weeks after the accident-plaintiff's condition had gotten “increasingly worse" such that “[i]t was harder to walk" and “[t]he more time on the leg, the more pain and the swelling." SeePerkins v. BroughtonHosp., 71 N.C.App. 275, 279, 321 S.E.2d 495, 497 (1984) (“The ordinary person knows, without having to consult a medical expert, when it is necessary to lie down and rest because his or her own body is tired, exhausted, or in pain, and the law has no inhibition against testimony to that effect. The credibility and weight of plaintiff's testimony was for the Commission to decide, not us.

  4. Brafford v. Brafford's Construction Co.

    125 N.C. App. 643 (N.C. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 8 times
    Overruling defendants' argument that expert's medical opinion amounted to nothing more than conjecture and speculation as to causal relationship between accident and injury because expert relied upon comparison between plaintiff's self-report of his level of activity before and after accident; concluding "it was permissible for the doctor to base his opinion on information provided by plaintiff"

    This testimony was competent and adequately supports the finding made. "The credibility and weight of plaintiff's testimony was for the Commission to decide, not us." Perkins v. Broughton Hospital, 71 N.C. App. 275, 279, 321 S.E.2d 495, 497 (1984) (citation omitted). We note that in its Opinion and Award, the Commission did not state that plaintiff was completely disabled; rather, it found that his brain injuries remained such that he was unable to return to his regular job as a roofer: