Legal Opinion

Calhoun v. Kimbrell's, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 22, 1969No. 6912IC392PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, J.

Defendants make several assignments of error asserting for the most part that there was no competent evidence to support the findings of fact and conclusions of law made by the Commission. There was one other assignment of error regarding the admission of evidence in the form of a hypothetical question asked one of the medical experts.

“To be compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act an injury must result from an accident arising out of and in the course of the employment. * * * Claimant has the burden of showing such injury. * * *” Taylor v. Twin City Club, 260 N.C. 435, 132 S.E. 2d…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Vause v. Vause Farm Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. Taylor v. Twin City ClubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  3. Rewis v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  4. Cole v. GUILFORD COUNTY AND HARTFORD ACC. & IND. CO.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. Jackson Ex Rel. Jackson v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Slizewski v. International Seafood, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Hodges v. Equity GroupCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  3. King v. Exxon Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Agee v. Thomasville Furniture ProductsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API