In Adams v. AVX Corporation, ________ N.C. ________, ________ S.E. 2d ________, 1998 WL 646487 (N.C. 1998)(151 PA 98), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of the Full Commission's authority to review and reverse a Deputy Commissioner's credibility findings.
- FACTS
Plaintiff alleged that she suffered an aggravation of a pre-existing medical condition, which resulted in permanent and total disability, as a result of an accidental exposure to chemicals on 4 August 1992. The Deputy Commissioner found (1) "that an incident at work on 3 or 4 August 1992, if it occurred, did not cause plaintiff to be unable to be gainfully employed after 4 August 1992"; and (2) "that there is insufficient evidence of record from which the [Deputy Commissioner] can find from the greater weight that any medical treatment plaintiff received from 3 August 1992 and continuing was made necessary as a result of the incident on 3 August 1992, if it occurred."
Plaintiff appealed to the Full Commission, which reconsidered the evidence but did not hear any live testimony. The Full Commission, with one Commissioner dissenting, reversed the Deputy Commissioner and awarded compensation. Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals and, in an unanimous decision, the Court of Appeals stated that the Full Commission's findings were not supported by competent evidence due to the fact that the Full Commission's findings were made simply from a review of the cold record and the Full Commission should have considered that the Deputy Commissioner was better able to determine the credibility of the parties. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals reversed the Full Commission's decision and determined that plaintiff did not suffer a work related injury.
Plaintiff petitioned for discretionary review before the Supreme Court.
- ISSUE
Whether the Full Commission is required to demonstrate that sufficient consideration was paid to the fact that credibility may be best judged by the Deputy Commissioner when the Full Commission reviews the case from a cold record.
- HOLDING
The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence presented at the hearing level and held that contrary to the Court of Appeals' statements in Saunders v. Broyhill Furniture Industries, 124 N.C. App. 637, 478 S.E. 2d 223 (1996), disc. rev. denied, 346 N.C. 180, 486 S.E. 2d 208 (1997), the Full Commission is not required to demonstrate "that sufficient consideration was paid to the fact that credibility may be best judged by a first-hand observer of the witness when that observation was the only one." The Supreme Court went on to state that to the extent that the Saunders decision is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's decision in Adams, it is overruled. The Supreme Court focused on the fact that the N.C.G.S. §97-85 places the ultimate fact finding function with the Full Commission, not the hearing officer. The Supreme Court stated that it is the Full Commission that ultimately determines credibility, whether from a cold record or from live testimony.
Having determined that the Full Commission had the authority to determine credibility issues, the Supreme Court then addressed whether the Full Commission's decision was supported by any competent evidence, even though there was evidence that would support findings to the contrary. The Supreme Court found that while the testimony was conflicting, there was some competent evidence in the record to support the findings of fact made by the Full Commission and consequently reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and ordered that the Full Commission decision be reinstated.
- ANALYSIS
The Supreme Court decision in Adams did not mention the 1983 Court of Appeals' decision, Pollard v. Crispy Waffle, 63 N.C. App. 354, 304 S.E. 2d 762 (1983). In Pollard, the Court of Appeals held that while the Full Commission has the power to review credibility decisions by deputy commissioners, it also agreed that "the hearing officer is the best judge of credibility of witnesses because he is a firsthand observer of witnesses whose testimony he must weigh and accept or reject." The Supreme Court's failure to disturb the Pollard decision leads to the possible interpretation that the Supreme Court is merely reaffirming that the Full Commission has the authority under G.S. 97-85 to determine credibility issues, but that deference to the hearing officer should be encouraged.