(a) If application is made to the Commission within 15 days from the date when notice of the award shall have been given, the full Commission shall review the award, and, if good ground be shown therefor, reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, and, if proper, amend the award: Provided, however, when application is made for review of an award, and such an award has been heard and determined by a commissioner of the North Carolina Industrial Commission, the commissioner who heard and determined the dispute in the first instance, as specified by G.S. 97-84, shall be disqualified from sitting with the full Commission on the review of such award, and the chairman of the Industrial Commission shall designate a deputy commissioner to take such commissioner's place in the review of the particular award. The deputy commissioner so designated, along with the two other commissioners, shall compose the full Commission upon review.
Provided further, the chairman of the Industrial Commission shall have the authority to designate a deputy commissioner to take the place of a commissioner on the review of any case, in which event the deputy commissioner so designated shall have the same authority and duty as does the commissioner whose place he occupies on such review.
(b) Unless waived by consent of the parties, all hearings of the full Commission shall be recorded. Court reporters, transcription personnel, or electronic or other mechanical devices may be utilized. If an electronic or other mechanical device is utilized, it shall be the duty of some person designated by the Commission to operate the device while a hearing is in progress, and the recording shall be preserved and may be transcribed, as required. If stenotype, shorthand, or stenomask equipment is used, the original tapes, notes, discs, or other records are the property of the State and the Commission shall keep them in its custody. The compensation and allowances of reporters shall be fixed by the Commission in a manner that is consistent with policies set by the Administrative Office of the Courts for the General Court of Justice. (1929, c. 120, s. 59; 1963, c. 402; 1977, cc. 390, 431; 2013-163, s. 1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
154
cases (
8 in the last 5 years), 1948–2026 · leading case:
Adams v. AVX Corp., 509 S.E.2d 411 (N.C. 1998).
Adams v. AVX Corp., 509 S.E.2d 411 (N.C. 1998).
· cites it 10× “N.C.G.S. § 97-85 provides in part: If application is made to the Commission within 15 days from the date when notice of the award shall have been given, the full Commission shall review the award, and, if good ground be shown therefor, reconsider the evidence, receive further…”
Deese v. Champion Int'l Corp., 530 S.E.2d 549 (N.C. 2000).
· cites it 10× “In Adams , we said the following: N.C.G.S. § 97-85 provides in part: If application is made to the Commission within 15 days from the date when notice of the award shall have been given, the full Commission shall review the award, and, if good ground be shown therefor,…”
Egen v. Excalibur Resort Prof'l, 663 S.E.2d 914 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 20× “Therefore plaintiff's appeal to the Full *918 Commission was not timely made pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 97-85. [1] Plaintiff did not assign error to the determinations, noted supra, in the order, but rather argues that the Commission erred in the manner in which it served…”
Moore v. City of Raleigh, 520 S.E.2d 133 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 18× “On appeal, defendant contends that the North Carolina Industrial Commission (“Industrial Commission”) erred in considering plain *333 tiff’s appeal of the deputy commissioner’s opinion and award because plaintiff failed to file his appeal within the fifteen day period required…”
Pittman v. Int'l Paper Co., 510 S.E.2d 705 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 12× “N.C. Gen.Stat. § 97-85 allows the Commission to receive further evidence when reviewing a decision of the Deputy Commissioner, provided "good ground be shown therefor.”
Cornell v. W. & S. Life Ins., 590 S.E.2d 294 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 12× “, and that the Industrial Commission received defendants’ notice of appeal of said Opinion and Award on December 17, 2001; It is therefore ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendants’ appeal to the Full Commission for failure to file a notice of appeal within fifteen…”
Woody v. Thomasville Upholstery Emp., 552 S.E.2d 202 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 8× “" Defendant purported to appeal the order pursuant to N.C. Gen.Stat. § 97-85 (1999) and Industrial Commission Workers' Compensation Rule 701 (Rule 701).”
Sanders v. Broyhill Furniture Indus., 478 S.E.2d 223 (N.C. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “section 97-85 empowers the full Commission, after application, to review an award of a deputy commissioner and “if good ground be shown therefor, [to] reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, and, if proper, amend the award.”
Fennell v. North Carolina Dep't of Crime Control & Pub. Saf., 551 S.E.2d 486 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 6× “" N.C.G.S. § 97-85. In Adams , the Supreme Court explicitly relied on this section in holding that, "the ultimate fact-finding function [lies] with the [Full] Commissionnot the hearing officer.”
Tew v. E.B. Davis Elec. Co., 541 S.E.2d 764 (N.C. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 16× “" Id, This Court upheld the opinion and award because the case had been reviewed by three commissioners and rendered by a majority of the members of that panel, as required by N.C.G.S. § 97-85. Id. II. Next, we consider whether competent evidence exists to support the…”
Crump v. Indep. Nissan, 436 S.E.2d 589 (N.C. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 10× “N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-85 provides for the review of an award by the full Commission: If application is made to the Commission within 15 days from the date when notice of the award shall have been given, the full Commission shall review the award, and, if good ground be shown…”
Whitfield v. Lab'y Corp. of Am., 581 S.E.2d 778 (N.C. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× ““Whether the full Commission conducts a hearing or reviews a cold record, N.C.G.S. § 97-85 places the ultimate fact-finding function with the Commissionf.”
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.