Cain v. Guyton
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Judge.
Defendant contends that the record herein does not support a finding of the Industrial Commission’s jurisdictional prerequisite that defendant regularly employed five or more employees. After careful consideration of the record herein, we disagree. During the time frame in question the Workers’ Compensation Act by statute was inapplicable to any employer “that has regularly in service less than five employees. . . .” G.S. 97-13(b) (amended 1979). The term “employment” was then defined as including “employments in which five or more employees are regularly employed in the same…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings YarnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
- Haynes v. . Feldspar Producing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Askew v. LEONARD TIRE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Dean v. Carolina Coach Company, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Pigford v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Williams v. ARL, INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
- Vaughn v. INSULATING SERVICESCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2004
- Beaver v. City of SalisburyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- WOODLIFF v. FitzpatrickCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Cain v. GuytonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.