Chinault v. Floyd S. Pike Electrical Contractors

293 S.E.2d 147, 306 N.C. 286, 1982 N.C. LEXIS 1438
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided July 13, 1982·No. 17PA82·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinions

COPELAND, Justice.

This case was consolidated for oral argument with the case of Deese v. Lawn and Tree Expert Co., No. 16PA82 on our docket. Both cases have similar factual settings and raise identical legal issues about the correct interpretation and application of G.S. 97-38. We have this day filed an opinion in the Deese case which fully addresses and decides this statutory question in our workers’ compensation law. Our reasoning and holding in Deese, --- N.C. ---, --- S.E. 2d --- (1982), necessarily governs the outcome in the instant case, and we consequently affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals without further ado.1

[288]*288Affirmed.

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

Chinault v. Floyd S. Pike Electrical Contractors, 293 S.E.2d 147, 306 N.C. 286, 1982 N.C. LEXIS 1438 (N.C. 1982).

293 S.E.2d 147 (Chinault v. Floyd S. Pike Electrical Contractors) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Friday v. Carolina Steel Corp.
534 S.E.2d 648 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2000)
Allen v. Piedmont Transport Services, Inc.
447 S.E.2d 835 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1994)
Winstead v. Derreberry
326 S.E.2d 66 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Deese v. Southeastern Lawn and Tree Expert Co.
293 S.E.2d 140 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1982)
Chinault v. Floyd S. Pike Electrical Contractors
293 S.E.2d 147 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1982)