Lee v. . Toler Son

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Lee v. . Toler Son

198 S.E. 622, 214 N.C. 823, 1938 N.C. LEXIS 423

Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided September 28, 1938·Published

Opinion

This was a proceeding under the North Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act. Plaintiff claimed compensation for injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by defendant. The Industrial Commission found as a fact from all the evidence that plaintiff did not suffer an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his regular employment resulting in the disability complained of. Upon appeal the award of the Industrial Commission was affirmed, and plaintiff appealed to this Court. There being evidence to support the finding and award of the Industrial Commission, the judgment is affirmed. Lockey v. Cohen, Goldman Co.,213 N.C. 356; Valentine v. Grocery Co., post, 828.

Affirmed.

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

This was a proceeding under the North Carolina Workmen's Compensation Act. Plaintiff claimed compensation for injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment by defendant. The Industrial Commission found as a fact from all the evidence that plaintiff did not suffer an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his regular employment resulting in the disability complained of. Upon appeal the award of the Industrial Commission was affirmed, and plaintiff appealed to this Court. There being evidence to support the finding and award of the Industrial Commission, the judgment is affirmed. Lockey v. Cohen, Goldman Co.,213 N.C. 356; Valentine v. Grocery Co., post, 828.

Affirmed.

Lee v. . Toler Son, 198 S.E. 622, 214 N.C. 823, 1938 N.C. LEXIS 423 (N.C. 1938).

Pincite

198 S.E. 622 (Lee v. . Toler Son) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related