North Carolina Court of Appeals Affirms Full Commission Decision: Injury does not Fall under Pre-Amendment N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-29

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has recently decided a case where the 2011 amendment of N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-29 was in dispute. In Brown v. N.C. Dept. of Public Instruction, the plaintiff suffered three injuries in 2002, 2011, and 2012, respectively all to her right shoulder. Here, the plaintiff alleged that her 2012 injury was related to her 2011 injury, which occurred days before § 97-29 was amended
Continue reading...

North Carolina Governor Signs Bill Aimed at Protecting Employees from Misclassification

On August 11, 2017, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper signed into law Senate Bill 407, which creates Article 82, Chapter 183 of the state’s general statutes — more commonly known as the Employee Fair Classification Act (the Act). Quite simply, the Act creates an Employee Classification Division (ECD) within the North Carolina Industrial Commission, led by Director Bradley L. Hicks. The legislation creating the ECD was introduced in 2015 but
Continue reading...

North Carolina Court of Appeals Holds Calculations of Average Weekly Wage Must Be “Fair and Just” to Both Employer and Employee

The North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled that when calculating the average weekly wage of an employee, the calculation must be “fair and just” to both the employer and the employee. In Ball v. Bayada Home Health Care, the plaintiff alleged to have suffered injuries to her left hand, bilateral knees, and right hip while employed as a certified nursing assistant (CNA) in February 2011. Her accident took place on the
Continue reading...

Post-Wilkes Decision Tips for Handling Workers’ Compensation Claims

We recently wrote about the impact of the Wilkes v. City of Greenville decision. In this ruling, the North Carolina Supreme Court significantly expanded the “Parsons presumption,” which posits a relationship between an original work-related injury and additional treatments required.  It is possible that the North Carolina General Assembly will overturn the decision — though there is no guarantee.  If the General Assembly does not act, then we can expect to
Continue reading...

Plain Language of North Carolina Statute Withstands Challenge from Claimant

In North Carolina, a claimant’s right to seek additional medical compensation expires two years after the date of the employer’s last payment of medical or indemnity compensation (absent limited exceptions). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-25.1 Recently, the North Carolina Court of Appeals, in Anders v. Universal Leaf N. Am, issued an opinion rejecting a claimant’s attempt to get around this time limitation holding true to the plain language of the
Continue reading...

Parsons Presumption Still Applicable to Same Body Part

The North Carolina Court of Appeals has handed down a ruling that clarifies and potentially expands the “Parsons presumption,” a North Carolina precedent that posits a relationship between an original work-related injury and additional treatments required. This new ruling, in the case of Bell v. Goodyear, establishes that when a court accepts an injured body part as compensable, subsequent injury to the same body part is subject to the Parsons
Continue reading...

Post-Accident Drug Testing: Part 7 — North Carolina

After every accident involving potential human error, North Carolina employers should perform a drug test. The test must enable the defense attorney to prove not only the presence of an intoxicating substance, but the concentration. Most simple urine drug screens do not provide that information. The North Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act makes “intoxication” by illegal drugs, or legal drugs not taken as prescribed, a defense to a claim for an
Continue reading...

If the “Last Act” to Trigger Employment Occurred Outside N.C., The Claim May Not Be Compensable

A recent decision by the Court of Appeals of North Carolina highlights, in the context of workers’ compensation claims, the importance of where the “last act” necessary to form an employment contract occurred — particularly for companies that draw workers from other states. The good news for employers is: If that step was taken outside North Carolina, the employer may have a jurisdictional defense. In Holmes v. Associated Pipe Line
Continue reading...