Legal Opinion
Poe v. Acme Builders
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
Decided June 19, 1984No. 8310IC783PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VAUGHN, Chief Judge.
The sole issue on appeal is whether plaintiffs injury was the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of employ-*149rnent and therefore compensable under North Carolina’s Workers’ Compensation Act. We hold that the injury did not occur as a result of such an accident and reverse the decision of the Industrial Commission.
Under the North Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act, an injury arising out of and in the course of employment is com-pensable only if caused by an “accident.” . . . “Our Supreme Court has defined the term ‘accident’ as used in the Workers’…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Harding v. THOMAS AND HOWARD COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Adams v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Davis v. Raleigh Rental CenterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Porter v. Shelby Knit, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Rhinehart v. Roberts Super Market, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Shay v. ROWAN SALISBURY SCHOOLSCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Barber v. Air Specialties of Pinehurst, IncNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2010
- Brown v. G. E. Piland SonsNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 1995
- Brown v. via Electric Co.North Carolina Industrial Commission · 2007
- Burrow v. Dunn BradstreetNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 2007
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.