Leigh v. Weyerhaeuser Co.
North Carolina Industrial Commission
1Dissent
I concur with the majority's conclusion that plaintiff retired before his alleged diagnosis and thereby does not qualify for § 97-61.5(b) benefits. Austin v. Continental General Tire, 141 N.C. App. 397,540 S.E.2d 824 (J. Greene, dissenting), dissenting opinion adopted,354 N.C. 344, 553 S.E.2d 680); see Abernathy v. Sandoz Chemicals,151 N.C. App. 252, 565 S.E.2d 218 (2002) (retired employees not entitled to § 97-61.5(b) benefits); Moore v. Standard Mineral Co.,122 N.C. App. 375, 469 S.E.2d 594 (1996) (§ 97-61.5(b) applies to victims of occupational disease who are thereafter removed from the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Russell v. Lowes Product DistributionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Austin v. Continental General TireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2001
- Austin v. Continental General TireCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Gupton v. Builders TransportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- Burwell v. Winn-Dixie Raleigh, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.