Legal Opinion · Dissent

Powers v. Lady's Funeral Home

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 4, 1982No. 8110IC502Published

1Dissent

*30Judge MARTIN (Harry C.)

dissenting.

The majority concludes that claimant’s injury did not occur in the course of his employment. The majority concedes that claimant was on a special errand for his employer in the journey to and from the funeral home, and therefore the usual “come and go” rule is not applicable to this case. It is also conceded that the special errand of claimant in this case was “an integral part of the service performed.” The requirement that the injury arise out of the employment is thereby satisfied, there being a causal relation between the injury and the performance of a…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gallimore v. Marilyn's ShoesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  2. Stevenson v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  3. Perry v. American Bakeries CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. Harden v. Thomasville Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  5. Petty v. Associated Transport, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1970

6 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