 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
[T] Crowder v. Preston Trucking Co.11/4/2003
vehicle identification number. The Commission found as a fact that the defendant was not prejudiced by the lack of notice. Since there was competent evidence in the record to support it, we are bound by this finding. Because we find no error in the Commission's determination of actual notice and no prejudice, we reject defendant's assignment of error.
Defendant's second argument is that the Commission failed to consider all of the competent evidence present in the record. The Commission is charged with the statutory duty to consider and weigh all of the competent evidence in the record and to make definitive findings of fact before rendering its decision. Harrell v. Stevens & Co., 45 N.C. App. 197, 205, 262 S.E.2d 830, 835 (1980), cert. denied, 300 N.C. 196, 269 S.E.2d 623 (1980). The Commission is required to indicate in its findings that it has considered or weighed all testimony with respect to the critical issues, but is not required to make exhaustive findings as to each statement made by any given witness or make findings rejecting specific evidence. Bryant v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 130 N.C. App. 135, 139, 502 S.E.2d 58, 62 (1998), disc. rev. denied, 349 N.C. 228, 515 S.E.2d 700 (1998).
Defendant contends that the Commission failed to consider the evidence its witnesses presented to the Commission. Defendantpresented Preston's former vice-president, one of Preston's dispatchers, the terminal manager in Charlotte and the company nurse as witnesses and other evidence regarding the lack of records concerning plaintiff's injury . The Commission in its opinion and award found as fact that it had reviewed the entire record and specifically referred to the defendant's witnesses.
This Court has found that the Commission need only make findings sufficient to permit this Court to reasonably infer that the Commission considered all relevant testimony. Pittman v. International Paper Co., 132 N.C. App. 151, 510 S.E.2d 705 (1999), disc. rev. denied, 350 N.C. 310, 534 S.E.2d 596, aff'd, 351 N.C. 42, 519 S.E.2d 524 (1999). We have also held that where the Commission's findings explicitly referred to evidence offered by specific witnesses, this Court could conclude that the Commission had properly considered the evidence presented by those witnesses, even though the Industrial Commission's opinion and award did not recount and disclaim the evidence given by those parties. Smith v. Beasley Enters., Inc., 148 N.C. App. 559, 562, 577 S.E.2d 902, 904 (2002).
The opinion and award here includes a specific finding that the testimony and evidence of the defendant was duly considered by the Commission. This finding is sufficient for this Court to infer that the Commission properly considered all testimony with respect to the critical issues. Defendant's assignment of error fails.
Defendant's third argument concerns the competency of the testimony regarding plaintiff's injury . Defendant argues that theplaintiff's injury is not compensable under the statute because the plaintiff's proof of causation is based on incompetent medical testimony.
A compensable back injury is defined by statute in N.C. Gen. Stat. ยง 97-2(6). The statute has been construed by this Court to include two ways of showing a compensable back injury: either injury by accident or injury from a specific traumatic incident. Richards v. Town of Valdese, 92 N.C. App. 222, 224, 374 S.E.2d 116, 118 (1988), disc. rev. denied, 324 N.C. 337, 378 S.E.2d 799 (1989). "When a pre-existing, nondisabling, non-job-related condition is aggravated or accelerated by an accidental injury arising out of and in the course of employment or by an occupational disease so that disability results, then the employer must com
Page 1 2 3 4 5 North Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|