Gantt v. Hickory Motor Sales, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Gantt v. Hickory Motor Sales, Inc.

174 S.E.2d 624, 8 N.C. App. 559, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1611

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJune 24, 1970

DocketNo. 7025IC19

StatusPublished

This text of 174 S.E.2d 624 (Gantt v. Hickory Motor Sales, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gantt v. Hickory Motor Sales, Inc., 174 S.E.2d 624, 8 N.C. App. 559, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1611 (N.C. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, J.

An agreement to pay compensation, such as existed in this case, when approved by the Industrial Commission, is equivalent to an award. Smith v. Red Cross, 245 N.C. 116, 95 S.E. 2d 559. Under G.S. 97-47 an injured employee may, on the grounds of change in condition, apply to the Commission to review any award. The statute expressly provides, however, that “no such review shall be made after twelve months from the date of the last payment of compensation pursuant to an award.” In the present case the date of last payment of compensation was 7 July 1967. Application for review was not made until more than twelve months thereafter. Nothing in the record indicates, and the Commission did not find, that anything occurred to estop defendant employer or its carrier from pleading the lapse of time. The language of the statute is clear and the claim is barred. White v. Boat Corporation, 261 N.C. 495, 135 S.E. 2d 216; Smith v. Red Cross, supra.

This disposition makes it unnecessary for us to pass upon appellants’ additional contention that the award was in any event erroneous since there is no evidence in the record tending to show that the medical treatment received by plaintiff during the year 1967, [561]*561which is the only subject of controversy in this matter, would tend to lessen plaintiff’s disability as required by G.S. 97-25.

The award of the Industrial Commission is

Reversed.

Beitt and HbdRICK, JJ., concur.

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

PARKER, J.

An agreement to pay compensation, such as existed in this case, when approved by the Industrial Commission, is equivalent to an award. Smith v. Red Cross, 245 N.C. 116, 95 S.E. 2d 559. Under G.S. 97-47 an injured employee may, on the grounds of change in condition, apply to the Commission to review any award. The statute expressly provides, however, that “no such review shall be made after twelve months from the date of the last payment of compensation pursuant to an award.” In the present case the date of last payment of compensation was 7 July 1967. Application for review was not made until more than twelve months thereafter. Nothing in the record indicates, and the Commission did not find, that anything occurred to estop defendant employer or its carrier from pleading the lapse of time. The language of the statute is clear and the claim is barred. White v. Boat Corporation, 261 N.C. 495, 135 S.E. 2d 216; Smith v. Red Cross, supra.

This disposition makes it unnecessary for us to pass upon appellants’ additional contention that the award was in any event erroneous since there is no evidence in the record tending to show that the medical treatment received by plaintiff during the year 1967, [561]*561which is the only subject of controversy in this matter, would tend to lessen plaintiff’s disability as required by G.S. 97-25.

The award of the Industrial Commission is

Reversed.

Beitt and HbdRICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 S.E.2d 624, 8 N.C. App. 559, 1970 N.C. App. LEXIS 1611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gantt-v-hickory-motor-sales-inc-ncctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack