Perdue v. Daniel International, Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Judge.
Plaintiffs first argument is that the Industrial Commission was wrong in dismissing his claim due to lack of jurisdiction. G.S. 97-24(a) provides: “The right to compensation under this Article shall be forever barred unless a claim be [sic] filed with the Industrial Commission within two years after the accident.” The requirement of filing a claim within two years of the accident is not a statute of limitation, but a condition precedent to the right to compensation. Barham v. Kayser-Roth Hosiery Co., Inc., 15 N.C. App. 519, 190 S.E. 2d 306 (1972).
Plaintiff contends that filing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Whitted v. . Palmer-Bee Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- Barham v. Kayser-Roth Hosiery Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
- Montgomery v. Horneytown Fire DepartmentSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Hardison v. W. H. Hampton & SonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
- Smith v. Allied Exterminators, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Belfield v. Weyerhaeuser Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Reinhardt v. Women's Pavilion, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
- Brunell v. Wildwood Crest Police DepartmentSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2003
- Garrett v. WinfreeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
- Knight v. Cannon Mills Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.