King v. Exxon Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ARNOLD, Judge.
The facts found by the Commission are conclusive on appeal, G.S. 97-86, and the scope of our review is the limited determination of whether there was presented competent evidence to support the Commission’s findings. Willis v. Reidsville Drapery Plant, 29 N.C. App. 386, 224 S.E. 2d 287 (1976). In order to recover under the Worker’s Compensation Act (Chapter 97 of the General Statutes) plaintiff is required to prove that the injury which resulted in death (1) was caused by an accident, (2) arose out of the employment, and (3) was sustained in the course of the employment.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gallimore v. Marilyn's ShoesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
- Harding v. THOMAS AND HOWARD COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Taylor v. Twin City ClubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- DeVine v. Dave Steel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
- Searsey v. Perry M. Alexander Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bowles v. CTS of Asheville, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Jackson v. L.G. DeWitt Trucking Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Cranford v. Interstate Brands CorporationNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 1995
- Jupiter v. City of RaleighNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 1994
- Pittman v. Spruce Pine Community HospitalNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2002