Baker v. City of Sanford
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
ARNOLD, Chief Judge.
Plaintiffs first three arguments on appeal address the issue of causation, assigning as error the Commission’s finding of fact that plaintiffs disability was not the direct and natural result of his work-related depression, and its conclusions of law that (1) his depression arose from an intervening event and (2) his occupational disease was not disabling.
In determining complex causation in workers’ compensation cases, “the Commission may, of course, consider medical testimony, but its consideration is not limited to such testimony.” Rutledge v. Cultex Corp., 308 N.C. 85,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
- Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings YarnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Harvey v. Raleigh Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
- Vause v. Vause Farm Equipment Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Starr v. Charlotte Paper CompanyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Pitillo v. N.C. Department of Environmental Health & Natural ResourcesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
- Brown v. Family Dollar Distribution CenterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Jordan v. Central Piedmont Community CollegeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
- Cannon v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.