Legal Opinion · Dissent

Motsinger v. Perryman

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 19, 1940Published

1DissentClabicsoN, J.

I think the judgment of the court below should be sustained. It may seem trite to refer to the major purpose involved in the adoption of workmen’s compensation acts. The facts in this case are such, however, that we deem it proper to discuss this purpose. At common law an injured employee was so often defeated in his efforts to recover damages growing out of injuries arising out of and in the course of his employment by the interposition of various defenses, such as contributory negligence, negligence of fellow servants, lack of negligence on the part of the employer, etc., that it was deemed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Staton v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
  2. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. v. MullenSuperior Court of Delaware · 1922
  3. Zurich General Accident & Liability Insurance v. Industrial CommissionIllinois Supreme Court · 1927
  4. Pettit v. Wood-Owen Trailer Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Commissioners of Beaufort County v. Old Dominion Steamship Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901

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

Powered by the Exa API