Dixon v. City of Durham,“suitable work” physical restrictions by Raleigh workers compensation attorney Travis Payne job injury lawyer Steven Edelstein

Business entrance white paint Edelstein & Payne workers compensation attorneys


Dixon v. City of Durham, 128 N.C. App. 501, 495 S.E.2d 380, disc. rev. den., 348 N.C. 496, 510 S.E.2d 381 (1998)

Workers' Compensation.
Court of appeals ruled that injured worker's refusal of an offered job was justified.
Recognized that “suitable work” for purposes of an injured worker receiving workers' compensation is work that not only meets the physical restrictions of the worker, but that also allows the worker comparable wage earning opportunities to those that they had before the injury.
(This was before the recent "reforms" by North Carolina's right-wing legislature, that drastically changed the workers' comp environment in favor of companies and management and against workers.)



Popular posts from this blog

OBTAINING PUBLIC RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS by Employment Law Attorney M. Travis Payne (originally published July 9, 2014)

Pulley v. City of Wilson, 674 SE 2d 478 Edelstein Payne workers compensation attorney job injury attorney Free Case reviews

THE BASICS OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW AND PROCEDURES North Carolina Guide (Originally posted by M. Travis Payne July 9, 2014)