Court Opinion

ID: 9587992
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:28:39.539582+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:05.257761
License: Public Domain

COPELAND, Justice.
This case was consolidated for oral argument with the case of Deese v. Lawn and Tree Expert Co., No. 16PA82 on our docket. Both cases have similar factual settings and raise identical legal issues about the correct interpretation and application of G.S. 97-38. We have this day filed an opinion in the Deese case which fully addresses and decides this statutory question in our workers’ compensation law. Our reasoning and holding in Deese, --- N.C. ---, --- S.E. 2d --- (1982), necessarily governs the outcome in the instant case, and we consequently affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals without further ado.1
*288Affirmed.

. We have thoroughly reviewed and considered the various authorities cited by the parties in their briefs in our more expansive and dispositive discussion in the companion Deese case, supra.