Shook v. Herring Construction Co.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Shook v. Herring Construction Co.

212 S.E.2d 413, 25 N.C. App. 231, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2226

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedMarch 19, 1975

DocketNo. 7412IC1044

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 S.E.2d 413 (Shook v. Herring Construction Co.) 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

Shook v. Herring Construction Co., 212 S.E.2d 413, 25 N.C. App. 231, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2226 (N.C. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

BROCK, Chief Judge.

The crux of plaintiff’s argument on appeal is that plaintiff’s testimony was the only evidence of how his injury occurred ; that plaintiff’s testimony supports an award of compensation; and that the Commission erred in denying compensation.

We note that defendant offered considerable evidence which tended to show that plaintiff’s testimony was incredible. In any event the Commission is not required to accept as true even the uncontroverted testimony of a witness. Wallace v. Watkins-Carolina Express, Inc., 11 N.C. App. 556, 181 S.E. 2d 767 (1971). Upon appeal this Court does not have the right to [232]*232weigh' the evidence and decide the issue on the weight given the evidence by this Court. Hollman v. City of Raleigh, 273 N.C. 240, 159 S.E. 2d 874 (1968).

Affirmed.

Judges Vaughn and Martin concur.

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

BROCK, Chief Judge.

The crux of plaintiff’s argument on appeal is that plaintiff’s testimony was the only evidence of how his injury occurred ; that plaintiff’s testimony supports an award of compensation; and that the Commission erred in denying compensation.

We note that defendant offered considerable evidence which tended to show that plaintiff’s testimony was incredible. In any event the Commission is not required to accept as true even the uncontroverted testimony of a witness. Wallace v. Watkins-Carolina Express, Inc., 11 N.C. App. 556, 181 S.E. 2d 767 (1971). Upon appeal this Court does not have the right to [232]*232weigh' the evidence and decide the issue on the weight given the evidence by this Court. Hollman v. City of Raleigh, 273 N.C. 240, 159 S.E. 2d 874 (1968).

Affirmed.

Judges Vaughn and Martin concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 S.E.2d 413, 25 N.C. App. 231, 1975 N.C. App. LEXIS 2226, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shook-v-herring-construction-co-ncctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack