award hearing (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

award hearing in North Carolina

12 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1874–2025 3 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Miller v. . Jonesgreen
nc · 1945 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
2 sentences

2021Finally, the State asserts that, even if Mr. Hall was otherwise entitled to claim the benefits of the public official immunity doctrine, the knowing making of false statements is not the sort of activity for which an award of immunity would be appropriate. ¶ 57 As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, “a public official, engaged in the performance of governmental duties involving the exercise of judgment and discretion, may not be held personally liable for mere negligence in respect thereto,” Isenhour v. Hutto, 350 N.C. 601 , 609–10 (1999), with such public official immunity having been

2021Finally, the State asserts that, even if Mr. Hall was otherwise entitled to claim the benefits of the public official immunity doctrine, the knowing making of false statements is not the sort of activity for which an award of immunity would be appropriate. ¶ 57 As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, “a public official, engaged in the performance of governmental duties involving the exercise of judgment and discretion, may not be held personally liable for mere negligence in respect thereto,” Isenhour v. Hutto, 350 N.C. 601 , 609–10 (1999), with such public official immunity having been

22
Robinson v. JP Stevens and Co., Inc.green
ncctapp · 1982 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1983–1995
2 sentences

1995App. 619, 627 , 292 S.E.2d 144, 149 (1982) (Full Industrial Commission “upon reviewing an award by the hearing commissioner . . . may reconsider evidence and adopt or reject findings and conclusions of the hearing commissioner”); compare N.C.G.S. § 97-85 (1991) with N.C.G.S. § 95-135(i) (1993) (giving similar authority to The Safety and Health Review Board and The Industrial Commission).

1983App. 619, 627 , 292 S.E. 2d 144, 149 (1982), our court said, “The full Commission, upon reviewing an award by the hearing commissioner, is not bound by findings of fact supported by the evidence, but may reconsider evidence and adopt or reject findings and conclusions of the hearing commissioner.” Our court in Hollar v. Furniture Co., 48 N.C.

22
Lee v. F. M. Henderson & Associatesgreen
· 1973 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1982–1983
2 sentences

1983Watkins v. City of Wilmington, 290 N.C. 276 , 225 S.E. 2d 577 (1976); Lee v. Henderson & Associates, 284 N.C. 126 , 200 S.E. 2d 32 (1973); Robinson v. J.

1983Watkins v. City of Wilmington, 290 N.C. 276 , 225 S.E. 2d 577 (1976); Lee v. Henderson & Associates, 284 N.C. 126 , 200 S.E. 2d 32 (1973); Robinson v. J.

12
Watkins v. City of Wilmingtongreen
nc · 1976 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1982–1983
2 sentences

1983Watkins v. City of Wilmington, 290 N.C. 276 , 225 S.E. 2d 577 (1976); Lee v. Henderson & Associates, 284 N.C. 126 , 200 S.E. 2d 32 (1973); Robinson v. J.

1983Watkins v. City of Wilmington, 290 N.C. 276 , 225 S.E. 2d 577 (1976); Lee v. Henderson & Associates, 284 N.C. 126 , 200 S.E. 2d 32 (1973); Robinson v. J.

12
Carolina Virginia Fashion Exhibitors, Inc. v. Guntergreen
ncctapp · 1979 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025See Carolina Virginia Fashion Exhibitors, Inc. v. Gunter, 41 N.C.

11
State v. Stanleygreen
nc · 1975 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004See State v. Stanley, 288 N.C. 19 , 26, 215 S.E.2d 589 , 593-94 (1975)(stating "it is well recognized that assignments of error not set out in an appellant's brief and in support of which no arguments are stated or authority cited, will be deemed abandoned").

2004See State v. Stanley, 288 N.C. 19 , 26, 215 S.E.2d 589 , 593-94 (1975)(stating "it is well recognized that assignments of error not set out in an appellant's brief and in support of which no arguments are stated or authority cited, will be deemed abandoned").

11
Hollar v. Montclair Furniture Co., Inc.green
ncctapp · 1980 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
2 sentences

1983App. 619, 627 , 292 S.E. 2d 144, 149 (1982), our court said, “The full Commission, upon reviewing an award by the hearing commissioner, is not bound by findings of fact supported by the evidence, but may reconsider evidence and adopt or reject findings and conclusions of the hearing commissioner.” Our court in Hollar v. Furniture Co., 48 N.C.

1983App. 489, 497 , 269 S.E. 2d 667, 672 (1980), discussed the plenary powers of the Commission and recognized that the Full Commission upon review “may adopt, modify, or reject the findings of fact of the Hearing Commissioner, and in doing so may weigh the evidence and make its own determination as to the weight and credibility of the evidence." (Emphasis added.) There was evidence to support the Commission’s finding and conclusion that plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Isenhour v. Hutto green
nc · 1999
2 sentences

2021Finally, the State asserts that, even if Mr. Hall was otherwise entitled to claim the benefits of the public official immunity doctrine, the knowing making of false statements is not the sort of activity for which an award of immunity would be appropriate. ¶ 57 As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, “a public official, engaged in the performance of governmental duties involving the exercise of judgment and discretion, may not be held personally liable for mere negligence in respect thereto,” Isenhour v. Hutto, 350 N.C. 601 , 609–10 (1999), with such public official immunity having been

2021Finally, the State asserts that, even if Mr. Hall was otherwise entitled to claim the benefits of the public official immunity doctrine, the knowing making of false statements is not the sort of activity for which an award of immunity would be appropriate. ¶ 57 As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, “a public official, engaged in the performance of governmental duties involving the exercise of judgment and discretion, may not be held personally liable for mere negligence in respect thereto,” Isenhour v. Hutto, 350 N.C. 601 , 609–10 (1999), with such public official immunity having been

22021–2021
Robertson v. Steris Corp. green
ncctapp · 2014
2 sentences

2019In Robertson v. Steris Corp. , this Court rejected the argument that "the award of fees and costs to [the defendant] was contrary to public policy in that the award was in violation of Rule 1.5(c) ... which provides that a contingent fee agreement shall be in a writing signed by the client and shall state the method by which the fee is to be determined, including the percentage or percentages that shall accrue to the lawyer." Robertson v. Steris Corp. , 234 N.C.

2019App. 525 , 533-34, 760 S.E.2d 313 , 319 (2014) ( purgandum ).

12019–2019
Pollard v. Krispy Waffle No. 1 green
ncctapp · 1983
1 sentence

1986Pollard v. Krispy Waffle #1, 63 N.C.

11986–1986
Lusk v. . Clayton neutral
nc · 1874
1 sentence

1897Keener v. Goodson, 89 N. C., 273 ; Lusk v. Clayton, 70 N. C., 184 ; Leach v. Harris, 69 N. C., 537 .

11897–1897
Keener v. . Goodson neutral
· 1883
1 sentence

1897Keener v. Goodson, 89 N. C., 273 ; Lusk v. Clayton, 70 N. C., 184 ; Leach v. Harris, 69 N. C., 537 .

11897–1897
Leach v. . Harris neutral
· 1873
1 sentence

1874Leach v. Harris, 69 N. C.

11874–1874

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-27 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-85 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 36 (1958–2025) IL 29 (1973–2023) PA 29 (1836–2020) NY 28 (1843–2026) CT 21 (1983–2013) TX 18 (1937–2020) LA 17 (1971–2014) AZ 17 (1945–2025) FL 17 (1959–2026) MI 16 (1935–2024) OH 14 (1959–2025) MO 13 (1939–2020) IN 12 (1943–2015) MA 12 (1977–2026) GA 12 (1938–2006) NC 12 (1874–2025) NM 9 (2002–2023) MD 8 (1974–2023) OR 8 (1979–2016) SC 8 (1940–2014) AK 8 (1974–2023) VA 7 (1933–2014) NJ 7 (1884–2025) WY 6 (1901–2015) VT 6 (1854–2024) AL 5 (1982–2015) MN 5 (1952–2012) WV 5 (1950–1992) WA 5 (1945–2003) CO 5 (1910–2025) MS 4 (1846–2003) UT 4 (1980–2014) DC 3 (1991–2019) KS 3 (1897–2020) OK 2 (1939–1993) TN 2 (2020–2022) HI 2 (1992–2012) RI 2 (2014–2017) ID 2 (1986–2007) NE 2 (2014–2015) WI 2 (1952–1999) KY 2 (1896–1985)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check