Legal Opinion

Graham v. Wall

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 8, 1941PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClakKSON, J.

The main question for our determination on this appeal: Was there sufficient competent evidence for the Industrial Commission to find that when plaintiff received the injury complained of, was H. E. Elkins serving in the capacity as a foreman or servant for defendants Wall Brothers and plaintiff was therefore an employee of Wall Brothers? We think so.

*88It is well settled in this jurisdiction, as set forth in Beach v. McLean, 219 N. C., 521 (525) : “Hence, under the statute the commission is made a fact-finding body. The finding of facts is one of its primary duties and it is the accepted rule…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Asheville Hosiery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  2. Beach v. . McLeanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Aderholt v. . CondonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. McGill v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Maxwell v. BeckTennessee Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Bye v. Interstate Granite Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Askew v. LEONARD TIRE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  3. Scott v. Waccamaw Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  4. Pearson v. PEERLESS FLOORING COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
  5. Alice K. Sharpe and Juanita Sharpe, by Her Next Friend, H. L. King v. Bradley Lumber Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1971

14 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