Legal Opinion

Booker v. Duke Medical Center

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided July 12, 1979No. 77PublishedCited by 419 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHARP, Chief Justice.

For an injury or death to be compensable under our Workmen’s Compensation Act it must be either the result of an “accident arising out of and in the course of the employment” or an “occupational disease.” The Court of Appeals concluded that Booker’s injury was not the result of an “accident” because no specific incident could be identified which led to his contracting the disease. Booker v. Medical Center, 32 N.C. App. 185, 231 S.E. 2d 187 (1977). None of the parties to this appeal assigned the conclusion as error. The question before us therefore is whether or not his…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Harding v. THOMAS AND HOWARD COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  2. Sparks v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Barron v. Texas Employers' Ins. Ass'nTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
  4. State v. WadeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Schwartz v. TalmoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973

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

3Cited by419 opinions

  1. Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings YarnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1983
  2. Hansel v. Sherman TextilesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Morrison v. Burlington IndustriesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  4. State v. HuffstetlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  5. Hendrix v. Linn-Corriher Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1986

414 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