Case ID: nc_368/html/0068-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JORGE TOVAR-MAURICIO, EDEMIAS DELEON MORALES, MARIO M. TOVAR, RANULFO DELEON VASQUEZ, BERNABE FRANCISCO CALIXTO, TOMAS MARTINEZ GUERRERO AND GABRIEL DOMINGUEZ-CONTRERA, Employees v. T.R. DRISCOLL, INC., Employer, GENERAL CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and CAROLINAS ROOFING AND SHEET METAL CONTRACTORS SELF-INSURED FUND, Carriers
    No. 9A14
    Filed 11 June 2015
    Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals,_N.C. App._, 768 S.E.2d 550 (2014), affirming an opinion and award filed on 21 December 2012 by the North Carolina Industrial Commission. On 18 December 2014, the Supreme Court allowed petitions for discretionary review of additional issues filed by defendants General Casualty Insurance Company and Carolinas Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors Self-Insured Fund. Heard in the Supreme Court on 21 April 2015.
    
      Diener Law, P.A., by Amanda Gladin-Kramer, Russell W. Johnson, and Richard A. Diener, for plaintiff-appellees.
    
    
      Orbock Ruarle & Dillard, PC, by Roger L. Dillard, Jr. and Jessica E. Lyles, for defendant-appellee T.R. Driscoll, Inc.
    
    
      Teague Campbell Dennis & Gorham, LLP, by Brian M. Love and George H. Pender, for defendant-appellant/appellee General Casualty Insurance Company.
    
    
      Goodman McGuffey Lindsey & Johnson, LLP, by Adam E. Whitten and Michael A. Cannon, for defendant-appellant/appellee Carolinas Roofing and Sheet Metal Contractors Self-Insured Fund.
    
   PER CURIAM.

As to the appeal of right based on the dissenting opinion, we affirm the majority decision of the Court of Appeals. We conclude that the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues was improvidently allowed.

AFFIRMED; DISCRETIONARYREVIEWIMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.