Haynes v. . Feldspar Producing Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.
The appeal presents the single question whether there is any evidence to support the finding of the Commission that the plaintiff was injuriously exposed to conditions augmenting his already contracted silicosis while in the employment of the defendant company. It is elementary that we are bound by the findings of fact of the Industrial Commission when they are supported by competent evidence, both under the statute itself .and by the custom of the Court. We refrain from multiplying citations of authority. It is also equally well established that the evidence should be considered 'in the…
2Cited by110 opinions
- Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings YarnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Barber v. Babcock & Wilcox Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
- Fetner v. Rocky Mount Marble & Granite WorksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Wilder v. Amatex Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Bye v. Interstate Granite Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
105 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.