Legal Opinion

Cannady v. Gold Kist

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 6, 1979No. 7910IC148PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Judge.

It is the duty of the Industrial Commission to make findings of fact and conclusions of law to determine the issues raised by the evidence in a case before it. G.S. § 97-84; Beach v. McLean, 219 N.C. 521, 14 S.E. 2d 515 (1941). Specific findings covering the crucial questions of fact upon which a plaintiff’s right to compensation depends are required, Morgan v. Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc., 2 N.C. App. 126, 162 S.E. 2d 619 (1968), and the importance of this responsibility cannot be overstated. As our Supreme Court has observed,

It is impossible to exaggerate how…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Booker v. Duke Medical CenterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. Beach v. . McLeanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Thomason v. Red Bird Cab Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  4. Morgan v. Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Harrell v. J. P. Stevens & Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Vieregge v. N.C. State UniversityCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
  3. Barnes v. O'Berry CenterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  4. Martinez v. Western Carolina UniversityCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Slatton v. Metro Air Conditioning, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994

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