North Carolina Industrial Commission, 1997

Adams v. Kelly Springfield Tire Company

Adams v. Kelly Springfield Tire Company
North Carolina Industrial Commission · Decided May 30, 1997 · ORDER FOR THE FULL COMMISSION BY DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

Counsel

APPEARANCES Plaintiff: Douglas E. Canders, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, North Carolina, Counsel of Record. Defendant: Cranfill, Sumner Hartzog, L. L. P., Attorneys at Law, Charlotte North Carolina; Nicholas P. Valaoras, Counsel of Record. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Adams v. Kelly Springfield Tire Company

Opinion of the Court

Commissioner Vance's Order denying discovery is the type of order contemplated when Rule 701 was promulgated. Therefore, the proper procedure to follow when a party disagrees with a ruling and appeals is for the Commission to place the matter before a Deputy Commissioner to hear the arguments, take evidence if necessary and to enter an Order with Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. A record will thus be created which can be reviewed by the Full Commission should one of the parties appeal the Deputy Commissioner's ruling.

Therefore, in review of the provisions of Industrial Commission Rule 701, Coy Vance's Order is hereby VACATED and this matter is REMANDED to a Deputy Commissioner for a hearing and filing of an Order with Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

This the _____ day of May 1997.

S/ ____________ DIANNE C. SELLERS COMMISSIONER

CONCURRING:

S/ ____________ THOMAS J. BOLCH COMMISSIONER

S/ ____________ LAURA K. MAVRETIC COMMISSIONER

DCS:jmf

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.