Sherwin v. CAPE FEAR VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Sherwin v. CAPE FEAR VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM

605 S.E.2d 740, 167 N.C. App. 655, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 2393

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 21, 2004

DocketNo. COA04-513

StatusPublished

This text of 605 S.E.2d 740 (Sherwin v. CAPE FEAR VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM) 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

Sherwin v. CAPE FEAR VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM, 605 S.E.2d 740, 167 N.C. App. 655, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 2393 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

STEELMAN, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from an opinion and award of the North Carolina Industrial Commission ("the Commission") denying his claim for workers' compensation benefits. Although plaintiff also gave notice of appeal from the Commission's 14 October 2003 order denying his motion for reconsideration, his assignments of error and arguments on appeal do not separately address this order. Accordingly, we confine our review to the opinion and award filed 22 September 2003.

Plaintiff has submitted to this Court only six pages of the transcript of his hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. He has not included in the record on appeal any narrative of the testimonial evidence adduced at the hearing; nor has he provided this Court with any of the medical records or other documentary evidence placed before the Commission. See N.C. R. App. P. 9(c), (d), 18(c)(6)-(8). Further, plaintiff has violated multiple North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure, including Rule 9(a)(2)(b), Rule 10(c)(1), Rule 28(b)(1), Rule 28(b)(2), Rule 28(b)(3), Rule 28(b)(4), Rule 28(b)(5), Rule 28(b)(6), Rule 28(b)(7) and Rule 28(b)(8).

The Rules of Appellate Procedure are mandatory; failure to comply with these rules subjects an appeal to dismissal. Steingress v. Steingress, 350 N.C. 64, 65, 511 S.E.2d 298, 299 (1999). Furthermore, these rules apply to everyone - whether acting pro se or being represented by all of the five largest law firms in the state. Because plaintiff violated many of the appellate rules, his appeal must be dismissed, notwithstanding his pro se status.

Bledsoe v. County of Wilkes, 135 N.C. App. 124, 519 S.E.2d 316 (1999). Additionally, we have reviewed this case on its merits and conclude that plaintiff's arguments are without merit.

DISMISSED. Judges HUNTER and ELMORE concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

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

STEELMAN, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from an opinion and award of the North Carolina Industrial Commission ("the Commission") denying his claim for workers' compensation benefits. Although plaintiff also gave notice of appeal from the Commission's 14 October 2003 order denying his motion for reconsideration, his assignments of error and arguments on appeal do not separately address this order. Accordingly, we confine our review to the opinion and award filed 22 September 2003.

Plaintiff has submitted to this Court only six pages of the transcript of his hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. He has not included in the record on appeal any narrative of the testimonial evidence adduced at the hearing; nor has he provided this Court with any of the medical records or other documentary evidence placed before the Commission. See N.C. R. App. P. 9(c), (d), 18(c)(6)-(8). Further, plaintiff has violated multiple North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure, including Rule 9(a)(2)(b), Rule 10(c)(1), Rule 28(b)(1), Rule 28(b)(2), Rule 28(b)(3), Rule 28(b)(4), Rule 28(b)(5), Rule 28(b)(6), Rule 28(b)(7) and Rule 28(b)(8).

The Rules of Appellate Procedure are mandatory; failure to comply with these rules subjects an appeal to dismissal. Steingress v. Steingress, 350 N.C. 64, 65, 511 S.E.2d 298, 299 (1999). Furthermore, these rules apply to everyone - whether acting pro se or being represented by all of the five largest law firms in the state. Because plaintiff violated many of the appellate rules, his appeal must be dismissed, notwithstanding his pro se status.

Bledsoe v. County of Wilkes, 135 N.C. App. 124, 519 S.E.2d 316 (1999). Additionally, we have reviewed this case on its merits and conclude that plaintiff's arguments are without merit.

DISMISSED. Judges HUNTER and ELMORE concur.

Report per Rule 30(e).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

605 S.E.2d 740, 167 N.C. App. 655, 2004 N.C. App. LEXIS 2393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherwin-v-cape-fear-valley-health-system-ncctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack