After hearing lay testimony, and reviewing the transcript of Dr. Udekwu's expert testimony, documents stipulated into evidence, and plaintiff's medical records, Deputy Commissioner Nance entered an Opinion and Award on 13 June 1994, denying plaintiff's claim for benefits. Deputy Commissioner Nance concluded that plaintiff failed to meet his burden of proving the elements of an occupational disease claim and that plaintiff's employment as a janitor did not increase his risk of contracting tuberculosis. Plaintiff appealed to the Full Commission. On 26 May 1995, the majority of the Full Commission filed an Opinion and Award, reversing the deputy commissioner's decision, and awarding plaintiff certain workers' compensation benefits. Commissioner Thomas J. Bolch dissented.
Defendants now appeal.
Defendant first argues on appeal that the Industrial Commission erred in failing to apply clear statutory language and follow established case precedents requiring plaintiff to prove the elements of an occupational disease claim. On appellate review in workers' compensation cases, our Court's inquiry is limited to whether there is any competent evidence to support the Industrial Commission's findings of fact and whether the Commission's findings support its conclusions of law. 99 N.C. App. If the evidence tends to support the findings of the Commission, these findings are binding on appeal, although there may be some evidence to support findings to the contrary. A finding of fact which is a mixed question of fact and law is not binding on appeal.