Tinsley v. City of Charlotte
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
McCullough, Judge.
• Attorney Curtis Osborne (“appellant”) appeals from the Opinion and Award filed by the North Carolina Industrial Commission (the “Commission”) on 22 October 2012 that limited his recovery of attorneys’ *745fees to one-third of the settlement in the third-party case. For the following reasons, we affirm.
I. Background
This appeal arises out of appellant’s representation of Michael K. Tinsley (“plaintiff’) in worker’s compensation and third-party cases. The cases stem from a 1 December 2007 work-related automobile accident in which plaintiff was injured.
In the workers’ compensation…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hendrix v. Linn-Corriher Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- White v. PateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Parker v. Thompson-Arthur Paving Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
- Radzisz v. Harley Davidson of Metrolina, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
- Hardy v. Brantley Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- DiCesare v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hosp. Auth.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2020