Shook v. Herring Construction Co.
Shook v. Herring Construction Co.
Opinion of the Court
The crux of plaintiff’s argument on appeal is that plaintiff’s testimony was the only evidence of how his injury occurred ; that plaintiff’s testimony supports an award of compensation; and that the Commission erred in denying compensation.
We note that defendant offered considerable evidence which tended to show that plaintiff’s testimony was incredible. In any event the Commission is not required to accept as true even the uncontroverted testimony of a witness. Wallace v. Watkins-Carolina Express, Inc., 11 N.C. App. 556, 181 S.E. 2d 767 (1971). Upon appeal this Court does not have the right to
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- GILBERT M. SHOOK, JR. v. HERRING CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., Employer, SENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published