Court: Court of Appeals of North Carolina; September 20, 2005; North Carolina; State Appellate Court
Frank Easton, the plaintiff, sustained a work-related injury while employed by J.D. Denson Mowing Company and was awarded temporary total disability benefits of $365.78 per week starting September 3, 1997. These benefits continued until he could return to work or until the Industrial Commission issued a new order. Easton's disability payments were suspended when he was incarcerated from January 22, 2003, to September 8, 2003, after the defendants, notified of his incarceration, filed a Form 24 on July 24, 2003. The suspension was approved by the Deputy Commissioner and affirmed by the Full Commission, which also granted the defendants a credit for payments made during Easton's incarceration.
Easton appealed, arguing that the Industrial Commission's decision to suspend his benefits due to incarceration was erroneous. The court referenced the precedent set in Parker v. Union Camp Corp., which established that individuals cannot receive workers' compensation benefits while imprisoned, as their inability to earn wages results from their incarceration rather than their work-related injury. Easton contended that Parker was wrongly interpreted and should be overruled, but the court rejected this argument, stating they are bound by previous rulings.
Easton also claimed that the case of Harris v. Thompson Contractors, Inc. overruled Parker. However, the court clarified that Harris is distinguishable as it involved a plaintiff who was allowed to work under a work release program while incarcerated, unlike Easton, who was already imprisoned at the time of his injury. Consequently, Harris did not overrule Parker and was not applicable to Easton's situation, reinforcing the decision to suspend his benefits.
Plaintiff argues for the reversal of the Industrial Commission's decision based on the dicta in Parker and the ruling in Harris. In Parker, the majority acknowledged potential hardship to a plaintiff's dependents due to the suspension of compensation during incarceration and suggested legislative review, although this commentary was not essential to the case's resolution. The court clarified that the outcome would not have changed even if dependents were involved, as the relevant statutes had not been amended since Parker. In Harris, the court ruled that compensation could be directed to the Department of Corrections under a work release program, with no mention of dependents.
The plaintiff's second argument contends that the Industrial Commission improperly allowed the defendant to take an immediate credit of $100 per week for payments made during the plaintiff's incarceration, potentially violating N.C. Gen. Stat. 97-42. The court disagreed, noting the Commission's discretion to award credits for overpayments. The plaintiff did not dispute the authority for the credit but objected to how it was assessed. The court referenced previous rulings indicating that while a credit can be granted, it should not shorten the period of compensation payments for indefinite awards. Given that the plaintiff was awarded total temporary disability with no definitive end date, the Commission's decision to allow the defendant to deduct $100 weekly was affirmed, aligning with legislative intent. Thus, the Commission's ruling was upheld.
