Legal Opinion

Hudson v. Mastercraft Division, Collins & Aikman Corp.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided July 21, 1987No. 8710IC199PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTIN, Judge.

In the present case, there is no dispute that plaintiff sustained a compensable injury. The parties contend on appeal, however, that the Commission erred in determining the extent to which plaintiff is entitled to compensation for temporary and permanent disability as a result of her injury. Their contentions have merit and require that we remand the case for additional findings with respect to both questions.

Appellate review of a decision of the Industrial Commission is limited to a determination of whether or not there is competent evidence to support the Commission’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Hansel v. Sherman TextilesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Schofield v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Moretz v. Richards & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  5. Crawley v. Southern Devices, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1976

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Forrest v. Pitt County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Braswell v. Pitt County Memorial HospitalCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
  3. Roberts v. ABR Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  4. Braswell v. Pitt County Memorial HospitalCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
  5. Forrest v. Pitt County Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API