McCrae v. N.C. D.O.C.
This text of McCrae v. N.C. D.O.C. (McCrae v. N.C. D.O.C.) 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
2. Plaintiff was placed in segregation on May 8, 2002 at Albemarle Correctional Institution. Correctional Officers Lee, Baker, and Waln took possession of plaintiff's property located in his locker because plaintiff had been placed in segregation. The contents of plaintiff's locker were shown to him, and plaintiff was asked to sign a DC Form 160 Personal Property Inventory acknowledging the contents of his locker that were being taken into the possession of the defendant. Plaintiff refused to sign the DC 160 because he alleged various items were missing. The allegedly missing items were noted on the DC 160.
3. On June 5, 2002, plaintiff signed a DC 160 acknowledging that the previously missing items had been returned to him. Plaintiff testified that additional items were still missing. Based upon the greater weight of the competent evidence of record, plaintiff's testimony is not accepted as credible.
4. The greater weight of the competent evidence of record establishes that the items that were missing were located and returned to plaintiff.
2. No costs are taxed as plaintiff was permitted to file this civil action in forma pauperis.
This the 16th day of February 2005.
S/_______________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER
CONCURRING:
S/_____________ THOMAS J. BOLCH COMMISSIONER
S/____________ BUCK LATTIMORE CHAIRMAN
DCS/llc
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
McCrae v. N.C. D.O.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccrae-v-nc-doc-ncworkcompcom-2005.