{
  "id": 8554959,
  "name": "HELEN H. BEAMON, Employee, Plaintiff v. STOP AND SHOP GROCERY, Employer and NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier, Defendants",
  "name_abbreviation": "Beamon v. Stop & Shop Grocery",
  "decision_date": "1975-11-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 7519IC651",
  "first_page": "553",
  "last_page": "555",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "27 N.C. App. 553"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "179 S.E. 2d 883",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1971,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "10 N.C. App. 668",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8555285
      ],
      "year": 1971,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/10/0668-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "98 S.E. 2d 289",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1957,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "246 N.C. 274",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8625913
      ],
      "year": 1957,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/246/0274-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "8 S.E. 2d 231",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1940,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "217 N.C. 468",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8610651
      ],
      "year": 1940,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/217/0468-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "196 S.E. 2d 571",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1973,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "572"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "157 S.E. 2d 1",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "271 N.C. 586",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8565668
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/271/0586-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "144 S.E. 2d 3",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1965,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "265 N.C. 329",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8575220
      ],
      "year": 1965,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/265/0329-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "158 S.E. 2d 865",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "272 N.C. 697",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8574378
      ],
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/272/0697-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 359,
    "char_count": 5795,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.579,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.714687233481314e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8296279049473541
    },
    "sha256": "a06a1ff399306db5e3e6ec9b904f0af0378dec3c42a9e7cd0ef13d0c772fbce7",
    "simhash": "1:09322ccafcc61de6",
    "word_count": 977
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:44:36.927205+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Morris and Martin concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "HELEN H. BEAMON, Employee, Plaintiff v. STOP AND SHOP GROCERY, Employer and NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier, Defendants"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PARKER, Judge.\nThe findings of fact made by the Industrial Commission are supported by competent evidence. They are, therefore, conclusive on this appeal. Jackson v. Highway Commission, 272 N.C. 697, 158 S.E. 2d 865 (1968). The only question presented is whether the findings of fact support the Commission\u2019s conclusion of law that plaintiff did not sustain an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment within the meaning of the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act.\nAn injury to be compensable under our Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act, G.S. 97-1 et seq., must result from an accident, which is to be considered as a separate event preceding and causing the injury, and the mere fact of injury does not of itself establish the fact of accident. Jackson v. Highway Commission, supra; Lawrence v. Mill, 265 N.C. 329, 144 S.E. 2d 3 (1965). The words \u201cinjury\u201d and \u201caccident,\u201d as used in the Act, are not synonomous. Rhinehart v. Market, 271 N.C. 586, 157 S.E. 2d 1 (1967). \u201cThus, an accident has occurred only where there has been an interruption of the usual work routine or the introduction of some new circumstance not a part of the usual work routine. A hernia or back injury suffered by an employee does not arise by accident if the employee at the time was merely carrying out his usual and customary duties in the usual way. (Citation omitted.) Injury arising out of lifting objects in the ordinary course of an employee\u2019s business is not caused by accident where such activity is performed in the ordinary manner, free from confining or otherwise exceptional conditions and surroundings.\u201d Russell v. Yarns, Inc. 18, N.C. App. 249, 250, 196 S.E. 2d 571, 572 (1973).\nPlaintiff cites and relies on Smith v. Creamery Co., 217 N.C. 468, 8 S.E. 2d 231 (1940). The opinion in that case must be read in the light of what was said in Hensley v. Co-operative, 246 N.C. 274, 98 S.E. 2d 289 (1957). See Gray v. Storage, Inc., 10 N.C. App. 668, 179 S.E. 2d 883 (1971).\nHere, the Industrial Commission has found on competent evidence that \u201c[t]here was nothing unusual about the way plaintiff handled the bag of charcoal and nothing happened in the usual sense of an accident.\u201d This finding supports the Commission\u2019s conclusion that plaintiff did not sustain an injury, by accident within the meaning of the Act.\nAffirmed.\nJudges Morris and Martin concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PARKER, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Davis, Koontz & Horton by Clarence E. Koontz, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.",
      "Hedrick, McKnight, Parham, Helms, Kellum & Feerick by Philip R. Hedrick for defendant appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "HELEN H. BEAMON, Employee, Plaintiff v. STOP AND SHOP GROCERY, Employer and NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Carrier, Defendants\nNo. 7519IC651\n(Filed 19 November 1975)\n1. Master and Servant \u00a7 55\u2014 workmen\u2019s compensation \u2014 compensable injury\nAn injury to be compensable under the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act must result from an accident, which is to be considered as a separate event preceding and causing the injury, and the mere fact of injury does not of itself establish the fact of accident.\n2. Master and Servant \u00a7 65\u2014 workmen\u2019s compensation \u2014 hernia or back injury \u2014 accident\nA hernia or back injury suffered by an employee does not arise by accident if the employee at the time was merely carrying out his usual and customary duties in the usual way.\n3. Master and Servant \u00a7 65\u2014 workmen\u2019s compensation \u2014 grocery store checker \u2014 injury while lifting charcoal \u2014 no accident\nA checker-clerk in a grocery store did not sustain an injury by \u201caccident\u201d arising out of and in the course of her employment when she picked up a 20 pound bag of charcoal from a grocery cart which a customer brought to her checkout stand and experienced pain in her lower back and hips where there was nothing unusual about the way plaintiff handled the bag of charcoal and nothing happened in the usual sense of an accident.\nAppeal by defendant from order of North Carolina Industrial Commission entered 1 May 1975. Heard in the Court of Appeals 10 November 1975.\nThis is a claim for benefits under the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act for injuries suffered by plaintiff while in the employ of the defendant, Stop and Shop Grocery. The sole question is whether the injuries resulted from an accident within the meaning of the Act.\nPlaintiff was employed as a checker-clerk whose duties included checking and bagging groceries. While so employed on the afternoon of 30 June 1973, she picked up a 20 pound bag of charcoal from the bottom of a grocery buggy which a customer brought to her checkout stand. When she did so, \u201csomething pulled in (her) back.\u201d She experienced pain in her lower back and hips. On 6 July 1973 she consulted Dr. Sellers, an orthopedic surgeon, who advised bedrest and medication. Dr. Sellers diagnosed her condition as acute lumbosacral strain and felt she could return to work on 16 August 1973.\nThe Deputy Commissioner entered an order finding facts and concluding that plaintiff did not sustain an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment within the meaning of the Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act.\nOn appeal, the full Commission made new findings of fact, including the following:\n\u201c3. Plaintiff had done this work for about fifteen years and was doing her regular duties which included handling all kinds of groceries including ten pound bags of potatoes, cartons of Cokes, etc. There was nothing unusual about the way plaintiff handled the bag of charcoal and nothing happened in the usual sense of an accident. The pain in her back was the only difference and she does not know what caused it to hurt, really, which is what she stated, other than that she did not usually lift bags of charcoal.\u201d\nThe full Commission adopted the conclusion of law and award of the Deputy Commissioner and denied plaintiff\u2019s claim. Plaintiff appealed.\nDavis, Koontz & Horton by Clarence E. Koontz, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.\nHedrick, McKnight, Parham, Helms, Kellum & Feerick by Philip R. Hedrick for defendant appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0553-01",
  "first_page_order": 581,
  "last_page_order": 583
}