## Facts

- In January 1989, Dennis Fletcher, an employee of Dana Corporation, suffered a compensable left-shoulder/arm injury when he was struck by a steel chip buggy that was part of a train of scrap-metal carts moved by a tow motor.
- Fletcher underwent treatment (including surgery) and returned to work at Dana on July 24, 1989.
- On September 8, 1989, Fletcher’s treating physician, Dr. Larry G. Anderson, assigned a 20% permanent partial disability rating to Fletcher’s left arm, and Fletcher received workers’ compensation benefits related to that rating and prior temporary total disability.
- On October 17, 1989, Fletcher reinjured his shoulder while trying to move a basket containing approximately one dozen 60-pound axle tubes.
- After the October reinjury, Dr. Anderson restricted Fletcher from lifting more than 40 pounds and from lifting overhead.
- Dana determined that Fletcher’s prior job did not fit those restrictions and that no other available positions at Dana fit the restrictions.
- Dana terminated Fletcher’s employment on November 7, 1989.
- Fletcher conducted an extensive search for other employment but did not obtain a new job until April 1, 1991.
- Fletcher sought temporary total disability benefits for the period of unemployment.
- A deputy commissioner denied Fletcher’s claim for temporary total disability benefits for the period after his discharge.
- Fletcher appealed, and the Full North Carolina Industrial Commission reversed the deputy commissioner and awarded temporary total disability benefits from November 7, 1989, through April 1, 1991, finding Fletcher’s inability to obtain employment was caused by his work injury despite reasonable efforts to find work.
- Dana Corporation and its carrier appealed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, arguing Fletcher was not totally disabled because he retained wage-earning capacity and that his unemployment was due to economic conditions rather than the injury.

## Issues

1. Whether the Industrial Commission may find “disability” (incapacity to earn preinjury wages) and award temporary total disability benefits when the employee retains some ability to work but, because of injury-related restrictions, cannot obtain suitable employment despite reasonable efforts.
2. Whether the Commission’s finding that the employee’s post-termination unemployment was caused by the compensable injury (and not general economic conditions) was supported by competent evidence and therefore binding on appeal.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the Industrial Commission’s Opinion and Award granting Fletcher temporary total disability benefits for the period from November 7, 1989, through April 1, 1991.
- The court held that “disability” under the Workers’ Compensation Act concerns incapacity, because of injury, to earn the preinjury wages in the same or any other employment, and that disability can be shown when an employee is able to work but cannot obtain employment after making reasonable efforts due to the injury.
- The court held that the Commission’s findings—medical restrictions on lifting and overhead work, lack of available work at Dana within those restrictions, and Fletcher’s extensive but unsuccessful job search—constituted competent evidence supporting the determination that Fletcher was disabled during the claimed period.
- The court rejected the employer’s argument that the Commission improperly based disability on poor economic conditions, because the Commission found the inability to obtain work was attributable to the compensable injury and related limitations.
- Applying the appellate standard of review, the court declined to reweigh the evidence and treated the Commission’s supported findings of fact as conclusive.

## Legal Principles

- Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-2(9), “disability” means incapacity because of injury to earn the wages the employee was receiving at the time of injury in the same or any other employment.
- A claimant may prove disability in more than one way, including by showing that, although capable of some work, the claimant was unsuccessful in obtaining employment after reasonable efforts because of the work-related injury and resulting limitations.
- When the Industrial Commission finds that injury-related restrictions and a documented, reasonable job search explain the failure to obtain work, it may infer wage-loss disability for the period in question.
- The Industrial Commission is the fact-finder in workers’ compensation cases; its findings of fact are conclusive on appeal if supported by any competent evidence.
- An employer’s claim that unemployment resulted from general economic conditions does not defeat a disability finding when the Commission, based on competent evidence, finds the compensable injury caused the claimant’s inability to obtain suitable employment.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission’s award of temporary total disability benefits because competent evidence supported the Commission’s finding that Fletcher’s compensable shoulder injury and resulting lifting/overhead restrictions prevented him from obtaining suitable employment, despite reasonable efforts, during the period from his discharge on November 7, 1989, until he found new work on April 1, 1991.


Fletcher v. Dana Corp., 459 S.E.2d 31 (1995)