Falton v. N.C. Dept. of Correction
This text of Falton v. N.C. Dept. of Correction (Falton v. N.C. Dept. of Correction) 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.
Opinion
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Berger. Upon reconsideration of the evidence, the Full Commission finds that the appealing party has not shown good grounds to receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Decision and Order.
2. Plaintiff failed to assert in his pleading or otherwise demonstrate that the alleged negligent medical care has been reviewed by a person who is reasonably expected to qualify as an expert under Rule 702 of the N.C. Rules of Evidence and that a person qualified as an expert is willing to testify that the medical care did not comply with applicable standards as required by Rule 9(j) of the N.C. Rules of Civil Procedure.
3. Expert testimony is necessary for plaintiff to prevail in this case.
2. Each party shall bear its own costs.
This the ___ day of March 2001.
S/_______________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER
CONCURRING:
S/_____________ THOMAS J. BOLCH COMMISSIONER
S/______________ RENE C. RIGGSBEE COMMISSIONER
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Falton v. N.C. Dept. of Correction, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/falton-v-nc-dept-of-correction-ncworkcompcom-2001.