Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Myers v. Bbf Printing Solutions

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 19, 2007No. COA06-1298Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWynn, Judge

I concur with the majority in affirming the Full Commission's award of total disability benefits to Mr. Myers. However, because I conclude that BBF Printing Solutions's abandonment of its appeal does not altogether negate its existence, I would affirm the Commission's award of attorney's fees to Mr. Myers. From that portion of the majority's opinion, I therefore respectfully dissent.

North Carolina General Statute § 97-88 refers to the Industrial Commission's "find[ing] that such hearing or proceedings were brought by the insurer" as a necessary step to ordering the insurer to pay attorney's…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Taylor v. J. P. Stevens Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. Estes v. N.C. State UniversityCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  3. Rackley v. Coastal PaintingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  4. Brown v. Public Works CommissionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  5. Cox v. City of Winston-SalemCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003

2 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