Mull v. N.C. Department of Correction

North Carolina Industrial Commission·Decided April 5, 2001·No. I.C. No. TA-16190·Published

Opinion

Upon review of the prior Order, plaintiffs Petition to Sue as Indigent, and plaintiffs T-1 Claim for Damages, the Full Commission has determined that Commissioner Ballance properly dismissed plaintiffs claim for damages and properly denied plaintiffs Petition to Sue as an Indigent.

***********
Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging injury as a result of several intentional acts committed by personnel with the Department of Correction. Injuries intentionally inflicted by employees of a State agency are not compensable under the Act. G.S. 143-291; Davis v. NorthCarolina State Hwy. Commn, 271 N.C. 405, 156 S.E.2d 685 (1967). Plaintiff has failed to allege negligence on the part of an employee or agent of the Department of Correction.

Plaintiffs claim is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and plaintiffs Petition to Sue as Indigent is hereby DENIED.

S/______________ RENE C. RIGGSBEE COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/_____________ THOMAS J. BOLCH COMMISSIONER

S/_______________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

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

Mull v. N.C. Department of Correction, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2001).

Mull v. N.C. Department of Correction (Mull v. N.C. Department of Correction) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. North Carolina State Highway Commission
156 S.E.2d 685 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)