In any case where compensation is payable for an occupational disease, the employer in whose employment the employee was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease, and the insurance carrier, if any, which was on the risk when the employee was so last exposed under such employer, shall be liable.
For the purpose of this section when an employee has been exposed to the hazards of asbestosis or silicosis for as much as 30 working days, or parts thereof, within seven consecutive calendar months, such exposure shall be deemed injurious but any less exposure shall not be deemed injurious; provided, however, that in the event an insurance carrier has been on the risk for a period of time during which an employee has been injuriously exposed to the hazards of asbestosis or silicosis, and if after insurance carrier goes off the risk said employee is further exposed to the hazards of asbestosis or silicosis, although not so exposed for a period of 30 days or parts thereof so as to constitute a further injurious exposure, such carrier shall, nevertheless, be liable. (1935, c. 123; 1945, c. 762; 1957, c. 1396, s. 7.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
57
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1949–2025 · leading case:
Caulder v. Waverly Mills, 331 S.E.2d 646 (N.C. 1985).
Caulder v. Waverly Mills, 331 S.E.2d 646 (N.C. 1985).
· cites it 34× “Caulder's evidence is that although dust from synthetic fibers is not known to cause chronic obstructive lung disease, it can make such a disease already in progress worse and, in Caulder's case, did make it worse. The narrow legal question before us, therefore, is whether…”
Barber v. Babcock & Wilcox Constr. Co., 400 S.E.2d 735 (N.C. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 9× “§ 97-53(24) since plaintiff was not exposed to the hazards of asbestos for as much as thirty working days or parts therof during the course of his employment with defendant-employer as required by G.S. § 97-57. The Full Commission (hereinafter “Commission”) issued an Opinion and…”
Rutledge v. Tultex Corp./Kings Yarn, 301 S.E.2d 359 (N.C. 1983).
· cites it 6× “That part of G.S. 97-57 pertinent to this case provides: In any case where compensation is payable for an occupational disease, the employer in whose employment the employee was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease, and the insurance carrier, if any, which was…”
Austin v. Cont'l Gen. Tire, 540 S.E.2d 824 (N.C. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 10× “See N.C. Gen.Stat. § 97-57 (1991) ("[W]hen an employee has been exposed to the hazards of *829 asbestosis .”
Shockley v. Cairn Studios Ltd., 563 S.E.2d 207 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 10× “The Commission further concluded that pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 97-57 of the Workers’ Compensation Act plaintiff was not entitled to compensation from defendants for an occupational disease.”
Anderson v. Gulistan Carpet, Inc., 550 S.E.2d 237 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 12× “The medical evidence of record fails to establish by the greater weight that [P]laintiff's employment with Comfort Inn or Best Stay Inn exposed her to the hazards of her occupational disease and resulting pain condition or that her employment with them augmented her disease,…”
Hartsell v. Thermoid Co., S. Div., 107 S.E.2d 115 (N.C. 1959).
· cites it 21× “To reach a solution of the question involved in this case, G.S. § 97-57 must first be considered and construed.”
Wilkins v. J.P. Stevens & Co., 426 S.E.2d 675 (N.C. 1993).
· cites it 6× “which is proven to be due to causes and conditions which are characteristic of and peculiar to a particular trade, occupation or employment, but excluding all ordinary diseases of life to which the general public is equally exposed outside of the employment.”
Hardin v. Motor Panels, Inc., 524 S.E.2d 368 (N.C. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “*354 Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-57 (1991), an employer is liable to an employee for an occupational disease if the employee demonstrates that she (1) suffers from a compensable occupational disease and (2) was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease while…”
Payne v. Charlotte Heating & Air Conditioning, 616 S.E.2d 356 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 6× “” According to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-57 (2003), “the employer in whose employment the employee was last injuriously exposed to the hazards of such disease” shall be liable.”
— N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-57(13) — 3 cases
Wilkins v. J.P. Stevens & Co., 426 S.E.2d 675 (N.C. 1993).
“which is proven to be due to causes and conditions which are characteristic of and peculiar to a particular trade, occupation or employment, but excluding all ordinary diseases of life to which the general public is equally exposed outside of the employment.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.