Legal Opinion

Childress v. Fluor Daniel, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 2, 2005No. COA04-1436PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUDSON, Judge.

The case arises from an attempt by plaintiff Jessie Bill Childress to reduce the amount of a workers’ compensation lien held by defendants Fluor Daniel, Inc. (Employer) and Broadspire (Carrier) on plaintiff’s recovery from a third-party tort-feasor. On 8 May 1997, plaintiff filed a Form 18B with the Commission alleging asbestosis and seeking benefits. Plaintiff later amended his Form 18B to include a claim for colon cancer. Defendants denied liability. On 16 April 2002, the Full Commission entered an opinion and award, awarding $20,000 each for three permanent injuries to three…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Radzisz v. Harley Davidson of Metrolina, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  2. Ales v. T. A. Loving Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
  3. Childress v. Fluor Daniel, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Moody v. Sears Roebuck and Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
  2. State v. BlackCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
  3. Dion v. BattenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2016
  4. Trustee Svcs. v. Rc Koonts & Sons MasonryCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
  5. State v. CuffeeCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API