Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Boylan v. Verizon Wireless

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 18, 2012No. COA12-856Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBeasley, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion affirming the increase in pay for attendant care and reversing the Commission’s denial of interest on Plaintiff’s award. I would reverse the increase in pay for attendant care.

This Court employs

a flexible case-by-case approach in which the Commission may determine the reasonableness and medical necessity of particular attendant care services by reviewing- a variety of evidence, including but not limited to the following: a prescription or report of a healthcare provider; the testimony or a statement of a physician, nurse, or life care…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Levens v. Guilford County SchoolsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
  2. Chandler v. Atlantic Scrap & ProcessingCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  3. Palmer v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  4. Shackleton v. Southern Flooring & Acoustical Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API