Legal Opinion

Maurer v. SALEM COMPANY

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 4, 1966No. 461PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The facts in the case are not in dispute. The sole question of law is whether there was sufficient evidence and stipulations before the Commission to support the finding that claimant’s injury arose out of and in the course of his employment. If the evidence and the stipulations, viewed in the light most favorable to claimant, support the findings the- courts are bound by them. Huffman v. Aircraft Co., 260 N.C. 308, 132 S.E. 2d 614; Pitman v. Carpenter & Associates, 247 N.C. 63, 100 S.E. 2d 231.

The Commission found the claimant was injured on employer’s parking lot adjacent to the building…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Bass v. Mecklenburg CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Rogers's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
  3. Davis v. Devil Dog Manufacturing CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. Pitman v. L. M. Carpenter & AssociatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  5. Huffman v. DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Barham v. Food World, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Hollman v. City of Raleigh, Public Utilities DepartmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Harless v. FlynnCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968
  4. Royster v. Culp, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
  5. Strickland v. KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977

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

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

Powered by the Exa API