Holcombe v. Dan River Mills/Woodside Div.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding the Appellate Panel was not required to allow the doctor's deposition to be taken and entered as evidence where the record reflected that, at the time of the hearing before the single commissioner, a party knew of the testimony of a doctor
• Industrial Commission Rule 67-31 relating to adjournment gives the single commissioner discretionary power with respect to the taking of additional testimony
• where there is a conflict in evidence from the same witness, the Commission’s findings are conclusive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).