Brown v. Carolina Aluminum Co. Brown v. Carolina Aluminum Co.

Brown v. Carolina Aluminum Co‪.‬

NC.40016; 224 N.C. 766; 32 S.E.2d 320 (1944)

    • $0.99
    • $0.99

Publisher Description

[224 NC Page 767] The deceased was employed by the defendant as a watchman in its plant at Badin. He had checked in for the day's work. Mion v. Marble & Tile Co., 217 N.C. 743, 9 S.E.2d 501. After going to his job, he returned to the washroom to get his flashlight. He met a fellow employee in a narrow passageway near the entrance to the plant. This fellow employee, being in a hurry, sought to get by the deceased without delay. The deceased had stopped him in friendly fashion by placing his hands on his shoulders. Because of the narrow passageway, the fellow employee, in his haste, pushed the deceased too hard and caused him to fall backward and to hit his head on the concrete floor. Thus the accident may properly be denominated ""an injury produced without the design or expectation of the workman."" McNeely v. Asbestos Co., 206 N.C. 568, 174 S.E., 509. Injury by accident implies a result produced by a fortuitous cause. Scott v. Ins. Co., 208 N.C. 160, 179 S.E., 434. An ""accident"" within the meaning of the Workmen's Compensation Act has been defined ""as an unlooked for and untoward event which is not expected or designed by the person who suffers the injury."" Conrad v. Foundry Co., 198 N.C. 723, 153 S.E., 266. The injury, therefore, was an ""injury by accident."" Slade v. Hosiery Mills, 209 N.C. 823, 184 S.E., 844.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1944
December 13
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
2
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SELLER
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
SIZE
56.3
KB

More Books by Supreme Court of North Carolina No. 597

Smith v. Steen Smith v. Steen
1945
Neal v. Marrone Neal v. Marrone
1953