Legal Opinion

London v. Snak Time Catering, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 1, 2000No. COA99-342PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HORTON, Judge.

Defendants first assign error to numerous findings of fact made by the Full Industrial Commission (Commission) regarding plaintiffs need for attendant care services. Our review is limited to determining whether the findings of fact are supported by competent evidence and whether the conclusions of law are supported by the findings of fact. Barham v. Food World, 300 N.C. 329, 331, 266 S.E.2d 676, 678, reh’g denied, 300 N.C. 562, 270 S.E.2d 105 (1980). On appeal, so long as there is any competent evidence to support the facts found by the Commission, they are binding on appeal…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Adams v. AVX Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
  2. Barham v. Food World, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Adams v. AVX CORPORATIONSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
  4. Woolard v. North Carolina Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  5. Godwin Ex Rel. Godwin v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Peagler v. Tyson Foods, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  2. Ruiz v. Belk Masonry Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  3. Levens v. Guilford County SchoolsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  4. Chandler v. Atlantic Scrap & ProcessingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  5. Patillo v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016

33 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