Burrow v. Hanes Hosiery, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Burrow v. Hanes Hosiery, Inc.

316 S.E.2d 63, 311 N.C. 297, 1984 N.C. LEXIS 1737

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJune 5, 1984

DocketNo. 121A84

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 316 S.E.2d 63 (Burrow v. Hanes Hosiery, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burrow v. Hanes Hosiery, Inc., 316 S.E.2d 63, 311 N.C. 297, 1984 N.C. LEXIS 1737 (N.C. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals contains a thorough statement of the relevant facts of this case. The Court of Appeals concluded that neither the evidence which had been presented by the plaintiff at two prior hearings nor the findings of fact contained in the Opinion and Award of the Full Commission supported a finding of a “change of condition” occurring after the plaintiffs final award of permanent partial disability compensation. Therefore, the Court of Appeals reversed the Full Commission’s award of temporary total disability compensation.

After carefully reviewing the record and briefs filed in this case, and hearing the oral arguments of counsel for both parties, we have concluded that the analysis, the reasoning, and the result reached by the majority of the panel of the Court of Appeals is correct in all respects. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.

Affirmed.

Justice Mitchell did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of the Court of Appeals contains a thorough statement of the relevant facts of this case. The Court of Appeals concluded that neither the evidence which had been presented by the plaintiff at two prior hearings nor the findings of fact contained in the Opinion and Award of the Full Commission supported a finding of a “change of condition” occurring after the plaintiffs final award of permanent partial disability compensation. Therefore, the Court of Appeals reversed the Full Commission’s award of temporary total disability compensation.

After carefully reviewing the record and briefs filed in this case, and hearing the oral arguments of counsel for both parties, we have concluded that the analysis, the reasoning, and the result reached by the majority of the panel of the Court of Appeals is correct in all respects. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals.

Affirmed.

Justice Mitchell did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

316 S.E.2d 63, 311 N.C. 297, 1984 N.C. LEXIS 1737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burrow-v-hanes-hosiery-inc-nc-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack