Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc.

North Carolina Industrial Commission

Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission

DecidedJanuary 27, 1999

DocketI.C. NOS. 454570 818448

StatusPublished

This text of Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc. (Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc., (N.C. Super. Ct. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Appeal to the Full Commission as being untimely. Pursuant to Industrial Commission Rule 801, Defendants' Motion is DENIED.

The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Kim L. Cramer, plaintiff's Industrial Commission Form 44 and defendants' brief on appeal.

On 6 March 1997, the date of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was neither present nor represented by counsel and did not have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim. Therefore, pursuant to its authority under G.S. § 97-85 and in the interest of justice, the Full Commission VACATES the prior Opinion and Award and hereby REMANDS this case for a new hearing before a Deputy Commissioner. Upon remand, every effort shall be made by the Deputy Commissioner to make certain that plaintiff receives notice of the hearing in a timely manner.

Defendants shall pay the costs.

S/_________________________ CHRISTOPHER SCOTT COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/______________________ RENÉE C. RIGGSBEE COMMISSIONER

S/______________________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

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

Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Appeal to the Full Commission as being untimely. Pursuant to Industrial Commission Rule 801, Defendants' Motion is DENIED.

The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Kim L. Cramer, plaintiff's Industrial Commission Form 44 and defendants' brief on appeal.

On 6 March 1997, the date of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was neither present nor represented by counsel and did not have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his claim. Therefore, pursuant to its authority under G.S. § 97-85 and in the interest of justice, the Full Commission VACATES the prior Opinion and Award and hereby REMANDS this case for a new hearing before a Deputy Commissioner. Upon remand, every effort shall be made by the Deputy Commissioner to make certain that plaintiff receives notice of the hearing in a timely manner.

Defendants shall pay the costs.

S/_________________________ CHRISTOPHER SCOTT COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/______________________ RENÉE C. RIGGSBEE COMMISSIONER

S/______________________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cornejo v. Poly Processing, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cornejo-v-poly-processing-inc-ncworkcompcom-1999.