Court Opinion

ID: 9853010
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:41:11.805152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:39.799250
License: Public Domain

Judge Martin, John C.,
concurring in the result.
I would affirm the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants. In my view, the evidence forecast by plaintiff falls short of the showing required to impose liability upon defendant pursuant to the exception to the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act, G.S. § 97-1 et seq., created by our Supreme Court’s decision in Woodson v. Rowland, 329 N.C. 330, 407 S.E.2d 222 (1991). Thus, plaintiff’s exclusive remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Act.
I agree, however, that plaintiff’s multiple violations of the Rules of Appellate Procedure so frustrate the review process in this case as to warrant dismissal of the appeal and I, therefore, concur in the result reached by the majority.