Legal Opinion · Dissent

Leigh v. Weyerhaeuser Co.

North Carolina Industrial Commission

Decided February 25, 2003No. I.C. NO. 035165Published

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

  1. Russell v. Lowes Product DistributionCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  2. Austin v. Continental General TireSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2001
  3. Austin v. Continental General TireCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  4. Gupton v. Builders TransportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  5. Burwell v. Winn-Dixie Raleigh, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994

4 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