Legal Opinion

Hollman v. City of Raleigh, Public Utilities Department

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 20, 1968No. Case 532; Case 528PublishedCited by 79 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParker, C.J.

Defendant assigns as error the Commissioner’s finding of fact, which was affirmed by the Full Commission as well as the lower court judge, “that Dr. Thornhill was of the opinion that astigmatism or nearsightedness was caused by the electric shock that the plaintiff received on September 21, 1962.” This assignment of error presents this question for decision: Were the stipulations and the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, sufficient to support the challenged finding of fact? If so, this Court is bound by them, for it has long been settled that in a Workmen’s…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Anderson v. LINCOLN CONSTRUCTION COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  2. Anderson v. Northwestern Motor Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. McGill v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  4. Askew v. LEONARD TIRE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  5. Tucker v. LowdermilkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951

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

3Cited by79 opinions

  1. Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Adams v. AVX Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
  3. McRae v. Toastmaster, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2004
  4. Stevenson v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  5. Roberts v. Southeastern Magnesia & Asbestos Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983

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

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

Powered by the Exa API