Larue v. Austin-Berryhill, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Judge.
Plaintiff contends that finding of fact No. 21 “is not only-contrary to the evidence but is unsupported by any competent evidence; moreover, it is inconsistent ánd -wholly incompatible with Findings of Facts Nos. 8, 9,10 and 11, in that Findings Nos. 8, 9, 10 and 11 show the method through which the employer was making payment for traveling.” Plaintiff further contends that the Industrial Commission erred in concluding that plaintiff’s injuries did not arise out of and in the course of his employment.
Findings of fact by the Industrial Commission which are nonjurisdictional are…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hollman v. City of Raleigh, Public Utilities DepartmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
- Hunt v. . StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Ridout v. Rose's 5-10-25c StoresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Alford v. Quality Chevrolet CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Humphrey v. Quality Cleaners and LaundrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fowler v. Chaircraft, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979