Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
28 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1984–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings Yarngreen2 sentences2018The first two prongs of the Rutledge test "are satisfied if, as a matter of fact, the employment exposed the worker to a greater risk of contracting the disease than the public generally." Id. at 93-94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 (citation omitted). 2018The first two prongs of the Rutledge test "are satisfied if, as a matter of fact, the employment exposed the worker to a greater risk of contracting the disease than the public generally." Id. at 93-94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 (citation omitted). | 4 | 15 |
Futrell v. Resinall Corp.green2 sentences2006In Futrell v. Resinall Corporation the Court of Appeals applied the Rutledge test where a plaintiff contended that he contracted carpal tunnel syndrome as the result of his employment. 151 N.C. 2006In Futrell v. Resinall Corporation the Court of Appeals applied the Rutledge test where a plaintiff contended that he contracted carpal tunnel syndrome as the result of his employment. 151 N.C. | 2 | 4 |
Mills v. Millsgreen2 sentences1986While it is difficult to reconcile the Rutledge test with the test articulated in Walston and relied upon by the Commission, see Mills v. Fieldcrest Mills, 68 N.C. 1986While it is difficult to reconcile the Rutledge test with the test articulated in Walston and relied upon by the Commission, see Mills v. Fieldcrest Mills, 68 N.C. | 2 | 2 |
Chambers v. Transit Managementgreen2 sentences2015Rutledge, 308 N.C. at 93 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 (internal quotation marks omitted). "[T]he first two elements are satisfied if ... the employment exposed the worker to a greater risk of contracting the disease than the public generally." Id. at 93-94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 . "[T]he third element of the Rutledge test" is "met where the [plaintiff] can establish that the employment caused him to contract the disease, or where he can establish that it significantly contributed to or aggravated the disease." Chambers v. Transit Mgmt., 360 N.C. 609 , 613, 636 S.E.2d 553 , 556 (2006). "[E]vidence tending 2015Rutledge, 308 N.C. at 93 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 (internal quotation marks omitted). "[T]he first two elements are satisfied if ... the employment exposed the worker to a greater risk of contracting the disease than the public generally." Id. at 93-94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 . "[T]he third element of the Rutledge test" is "met where the [plaintiff] can establish that the employment caused him to contract the disease, or where he can establish that it significantly contributed to or aggravated the disease." Chambers v. Transit Mgmt., 360 N.C. 609 , 613, 636 S.E.2d 553 , 556 (2006). "[E]vidence tending | 1 | 5 |
Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc.green2 sentences2004“Although it is not necessary for doctors to use the exact wording of ‘significantly con-tributting],’ there must be some indication of the degree of contribution such as ‘more likely than not’ to meet the Rutledge test.” Hardin, 136 N.C. 2004“Although it is not necessary for doctors to use the exact wording of ‘significantly con-tributting],’ there must be some indication of the degree of contribution such as ‘more likely than not’ to meet the Rutledge test.” Hardin, 136 N.C. | 1 | 4 |
Norris v. Drexel Heritage Furnishings, Inc./Mascogreen2 sentences2006Id. (citing Norris v. Drexel Heritage Furnishings, Inc., 139 N.C. 2006Id. (citing Norris v. Drexel Heritage Furnishings, Inc., 139 N.C. | 1 | 2 |
Booker v. Duke Medical Centergreen2 sentences2003Notwithstanding “the overriding legislative goal of providing comprehensive coverage for occupational diseases,” Booker v. Medical Center, 297 N.C. 458, 471 , 256 S.E.2d 189, 198 (1979), the plaintiff has the burden of proof on all three elements of the Rutledge test. 2003Notwithstanding “the overriding legislative goal of providing comprehensive coverage for occupational diseases,” Booker v. Medical Center, 297 N.C. 458, 471 , 256 S.E.2d 189, 198 (1979), the plaintiff has the burden of proof on all three elements of the Rutledge test. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Whiteside Estate, Inc.green2 sentences2002See, e.g., Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc., 136 N.C.App. 351, 354 , 524 S.E.2d 368, 371 , disc. review denied, 351 N.C. 473 , 543 S.E.2d 488 (2000). 2002See, e.g., Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc., 136 N.C.App. 351, 354 , 524 S.E.2d 368, 371 , disc. review denied, 351 N.C. 473 , 543 S.E.2d 488 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc.green2 sentences2002See, e.g., Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc., 136 N.C.App. 351, 354 , 524 S.E.2d 368, 371 , disc. review denied, 351 N.C. 473 , 543 S.E.2d 488 (2000). 2002See, e.g., Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc., 136 N.C.App. 351, 354 , 524 S.E.2d 368, 371 , disc. review denied, 351 N.C. 473 , 543 S.E.2d 488 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Haynes v. . Feldspar Producing Co.green2 sentences1985If, upon remand, the Commission concludes that plaintiff has an occupational disease within the purview of the Rutledge rule, it will then have to determine in which employment plaintiff was “last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease,” G.S. 97-57; Rutledge v. Tultex Corp., supra; Haynes v. Feldspar Producing Co., 222 N.C. 163, 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 275, 279 (1942), and award compensation accordingly. 1985If, upon remand, the Commission concludes that plaintiff has an occupational disease within the purview of the Rutledge rule, it will then have to determine in which employment plaintiff was “last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease,” G.S. 97-57; Rutledge v. Tultex Corp., supra; Haynes v. Feldspar Producing Co., 222 N.C. 163, 170 , 22 S.E. 2d 275, 279 (1942), and award compensation accordingly. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Futrell v. Resinall Corp.
neutral
2 sentences2006"Evidence tending to show that the employment simply aggravated or contributed to the employee's condition goes only to the issue of causation, the third element of the Rutledge test." Futrell v. Resinall Corp., 357 N.C. 158 , 579 S.E.2d 269 (2003). 2. 2006"Evidence tending to show that the employment simply aggravated or contributed to the employee's condition goes only to the issue of causation, the third element of the Rutledge test." Futrell v. Resinall Corp., 357 N.C. 158 , 579 S.E.2d 269 (2003). 2. | 4 | 2005–2010 |
Robbins v. Wake County Board of Education
green
2 sentences2009Thus, this Court concluded that “the Commission’s findings with respect to the first two elements of the Rutledge test were sufficiently supported by competent evidence.” Id. at 522, 566 S.E.2d at 142-43 . 2009Thus, this Court concluded that “the Commission’s findings with respect to the first two elements of the Rutledge test were sufficiently supported by competent evidence.” Id. at 522, 566 S.E.2d at 142-43 . | 3 | 2003–2009 |
Locklear v. Stedman Corp./Sara Lee Knit Products
green
2 sentences2004Locklear v. Stedman Corp., *240 131 N.C. 2004Locklear v. Stedman Corp., *240 131 N.C. | 2 | 2000–2004 |
Allred v. Exceptional Landscapes, Inc.
green
2 sentences2018App. 229 , 232, 743 S.E.2d 48 , 51 (2013) ("Unchallenged findings of fact are presumed to be supported by competent evidence and are binding on appeal." (citation omitted) ). *217 The interplay between the three prongs of the Rutledge test was explained by this Court in Futrell . 2018App. 229 , 232, 743 S.E.2d 48 , 51 (2013) ("Unchallenged findings of fact are presumed to be supported by competent evidence and are binding on appeal." (citation omitted) ). *217 The interplay between the three prongs of the Rutledge test was explained by this Court in Futrell . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Jarrett v. McCreary Modern, Inc.
green
2 sentences2011App. at 240 , 605 S.E.2d at 203 . 2011App. at 240 , 605 S.E.2d at 203 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Chambers v. Transit Management
neutral
2 sentences2008Chambers v. Transit Mgmt. , 360 N.C. 609 , 611 , 636 S.E.2d 553 , 555 (2006), reh'g denied , 361 N.C. 227 , 641 S.E.2d 801 (2007). *Page 13 2. 2008Chambers v. Transit Mgmt. , 360 N.C. 609 , 611 , 636 S.E.2d 553 , 555 (2006), reh'g denied , 361 N.C. 227 , 641 S.E.2d 801 (2007). *Page 13 2. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Walden v. Morgan
neutral
2 sentences2008Chambers v. Transit Mgmt. , 360 N.C. 609 , 611 , 636 S.E.2d 553 , 555 (2006), reh'g denied , 361 N.C. 227 , 641 S.E.2d 801 (2007). *Page 13 2. 2008Chambers v. Transit Mgmt. , 360 N.C. 609 , 611 , 636 S.E.2d 553 , 555 (2006), reh'g denied , 361 N.C. 227 , 641 S.E.2d 801 (2007). *Page 13 2. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Faison v. Allen Canning Co.
green
2 sentences2008The standard required to establish a causal connection between a plaintiff’s injuries and her employment is “a reasonable degree of medical certainty.” Faison v. Allen Canning Co., 163 N.C. 2008The standard required to establish a causal connection between a plaintiff’s injuries and her employment is “a reasonable degree of medical certainty.” Faison v. Allen Canning Co., 163 N.C. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Pressley v. Southwestern Freight Lines
green
2 sentences2003Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings Yarn, 308 N.C. at 93 -94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 ; Pressley v. Southwestern Freight Lines , 144 N.C. 2003Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings Yarn, 308 N.C. at 93 -94 , 301 S.E.2d at 365 ; Pressley v. Southwestern Freight Lines , 144 N.C. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Keel v. H & v. INC.
green
2 sentences2003Keel v. H & V Inc., 107 N.C. 2003Keel v. H & V Inc., 107 N.C. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Adkins v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.
green
2 sentences1986App. 621 , 322 S.E. 2d 642 (1984) (findings insufficient under the Rutledge test). 1986App. 621 , 322 S.E. 2d 642 (1984) (findings insufficient under the Rutledge test). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Clark v. American & Efird Mills
green
2 sentences1985App. 237 , 313 S.E. 2d 11 , vacated and remanded, 312 N.C. 487 , 322 S.E. 2d 771 (1984), and Clark v. American & Efird Mills, 66 N.C. 1985App. 237 , 313 S.E. 2d 11 , vacated and remanded, 312 N.C. 487 , 322 S.E. 2d 771 (1984), and Clark v. American & Efird Mills, 66 N.C. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Dean v. Cone Mills Corp.
green
2 sentences1985For even if we were to assume that the Commission presciently anticipated the Rutledge standard in referring to aggravation or acceleration in its findings, we would still be compelled to remand by Dean v. Cone Mills Corp., 67 N.C. 1985For even if we were to assume that the Commission presciently anticipated the Rutledge standard in referring to aggravation or acceleration in its findings, we would still be compelled to remand by Dean v. Cone Mills Corp., 67 N.C. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Dean v. Cone Mills Corp.
neutral
2 sentences1985App. 237 , 313 S.E. 2d 11 , vacated and remanded, 312 N.C. 487 , 322 S.E. 2d 771 (1984), and Clark v. American & Efird Mills, 66 N.C. 1985App. 237 , 313 S.E. 2d 11 , vacated and remanded, 312 N.C. 487 , 322 S.E. 2d 771 (1984), and Clark v. American & Efird Mills, 66 N.C. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.