Graham v. Wall
Supreme Court of North Carolina
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
- Johnson v. Asheville Hosiery Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Beach v. . McLeanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
- Aderholt v. . CondonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- McGill v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Maxwell v. BeckTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Bye v. Interstate Granite Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Askew v. LEONARD TIRE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Scott v. Waccamaw Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
- Pearson v. PEERLESS FLOORING COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- 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.