CONKLIN v. HENNIS FREIGHT LINES, INC. No. 7521IC340.
218 S.E.2d 484 (1975)
27 N.C. App. 260
John C. CONKLIN, Employee, v. HENNIS FREIGHT LINES, INC., Employer, and Transport Insurance Company, Carrier.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina.
October 15, 1975.
L. G. Gordon, Jr., Winston-Salem, for plaintiff appellee.
Deal, Hutchins & Minor by Walter W. Pitt, Jr., Winston-Salem, for defendant appellants.
In general, appellants contend that once claimant "rested" his case, the Commission should have decided the case on the basis of the evidence then in the record. Appellants argue that the Commission was without authority to retain jurisdiction and ordered another hearing upon the request of either party, thereby giving claimant a second chance to prove his case.
Appellants have not brought forward argument or referred us to cases that we find persuasive in support of their position.
The Workmen's Compensation Act should be construed liberally, so that its benefits are not denied upon technical and narrow interpretation. The strict rules applicable to ordinary civil actions are not appropriate in proceedings under the Act. Although grounded on different facts and somewhat different principles of law, the
The Court thereafter quotes with approval additional language as follows:
The Court also found convincing the following reasoning of the Connecticut court:
On the facts of the case before us, we believe the Commission could have allowed claimant to reopen his case to present evidence relating to the extent of his disability after the ten-week period, even though, in the exercise of due diligence, that evidence could have been presented at the first hearing. The same reasoning would certainly allow the Commission to keep the case open in order to give claimant another opportunity to gather the missing evidence essential to the determination of the issue.
The Commission's order is affirmed.
MORRIS and CLARK, JJ., concur.
- No Cases Found