Branson v. Duke University

Central to the majority's denial of benefits to plaintiff was its finding that plaintiffs reaction to odors and chemicals at GKN Automotive and Duke University is due to her personal sensitivity to odors and chemicals which is part of her pre-existing hyperactive airways disease. This was based on the majority's reading of Nix v. Collins Aikman,_____N.C. App. ___ 566 S.E.2d 176 (2002); Hilliard v. Apex Cabinet, 54 N.C. App. 173, 282 S.E.2d 828 (1981), Mills v. J.P. Stevens Co.,53 N.C. App. 341, 280 S.E.2d 802 (1981) and Sebastian v. Hairstyling, 40 N.C. App. 30,251 S.E.2d 872 (1979).

As Judge…