Workers’ Compensation Claim Filed After Employee Laid Off
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 645
Tags:
None
The North Carolina Court of Appeals has recently upheld an award of workers’ compensation benefits to an employee who did not file her claim until after she was laid off by her employer.
The employee had complained to a supervisor and to a company nurse about symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome while she was still working. However, she continued working at her job until she was laid off by her employer. After she was laid off, the employee retrained to become a nurse’s assistant. However, she could not work as a nurse’s assistant because she did not meet the physical requirements of that job which included lifting. She also sought other employment without success.
After she was laid off work, the employee filed a workers’ compensation claim based upon the carpal tunnel syndrome she developed while working for her employer.
The North Carolina Industrial Commission held that the employee is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits. The Industrial Commission pointed out that the plaintiff testified that she complained of wrist pain to a supervisor while working for the employer and that a company nurse gave her pain medication and “stretch bands” to go on her wrist. Evidence included the fact that she saw a physician sometime in 1991 or 1992 and that she continued to complain about wrist pain until the end of her employment on October of 1994.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals upheld the award to the employee made by the North Carolina Industrial Commission. The case, Roberts vs. Sara Lee Hosiery is significant in that it demonstrates that a viable claim can be made for workers’ compensation benefits even though the employee worked up until the time she was laid off.
Although the employee continued to do the job even with her carpal tunnel condition until she was laid off, she was unable to work for other employers. There was evidence from the employee’s doctor that she was capable of employment however she would be subject to restrictions including the avoidance of repetitive pushing, pulling, grabbing, pinching, squeezing or other production-related activities. The doctor found that these restrictions were permanent. The doctor had testified that she had an increased risk of developing carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of her employment and that her employment significantly contributed to or was a significant causal factor in her development of carpal tunnel syndrome.
The North Carolina Court of Appeals held that the evidence set out above was sufficient to support the Industrial Commission’s Award of workers’ compensation benefits to the employee.
This case is an example of how a claim can be successfully persuade even though the facts of the case appear to make recovery very doubtful.