Legal Opinion

McNair Ex Rel. McNeil v. Ward

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 19, 1954No. 679PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEeviN, J.

The evidence calls into play the presumption that the infant plaintiff and his employers have accepted the provisions of the North Carolina Workmen’s Compensation Act. G.S. 97-3; Pilley v. Cotton Mills, 201 N.C. 426, 160 S.E. 479. Consequently the presiding judge did not err in nonsuiting the action as to the employers (Tscheiller v. Weaving Co., 214 N.C. 449, 199 S.E. 623; Lee v. American Enka, 212 N.C. 455, 193 S.E. 809; Miller v. Roberts, 212 N.C. 126, 193 S.E. 286; Francis v. Wood Turning Co., 208 N.C. 517, 181 S.E. 628; McNeely v. Asbestos Co., 206 N.C. 568, 174 S.E. 509), or as to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Warner v. LederSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. McNeely v. Carolina Asbestos Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Lee v. . American Enka Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Tscheiller v. National Weaving Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Miller v. . RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Burgess Ex Rel. Burgess v. GibbsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Lemmerman v. A. T. Williams Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Lennie v. Profile Products, LLCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
  4. Weaver v. BennettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  5. Horney v. Meredith Swimming Pool CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966

5 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