North Carolina § 143-291 - Industrial Commission constituted a court to hear and determine claims; damages; liability insurance in lieu of obligation under Article.

§ 143-291. Industrial Commission constituted a court to hear and determine claims; damages; liability insurance in lieu of obligation under Article.

The North Carolina Industrial Commission is hereby constituted a court for the purpose of hearing and passing upon tort claims against the State Board of Education, the Board of Transportation, and all other departments, institutions and agencies of the State. The Industrial Commission shall determine whether or not each individual claim arose as a result of the negligence of any officer, employee, involuntary servant or agent of the State while acting within the scope of his office, employment, service, agency or authority, under circumstances where the State of North Carolina, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the laws of North Carolina. If the Commission finds that there was negligence on the part of an officer, employee, involuntary servant or agent of the State while acting within the scope of his office, employment, service, agency or authority that was the proximate cause of the injury and that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the claimant or the person in whose behalf the claim is asserted, the Commission shall determine the amount of damages that the claimant is entitled to be paid, including medical and other expenses, and by appropriate order direct the payment of damages as provided in subsection (a1) of this section, but in no event shall the amount of damages awarded exceed the amounts authorized in G.S. 143-299.2 cumulatively to all claimants on account of injury and damage to any one person arising out of a single occurrence. Community colleges and technical colleges shall be deemed State agencies for purposes of this Article. The fact that a claim may be brought under more than one Article under this Chapter shall not increase the foregoing maximum liability of the State. The unit of State government that employed the employee at the time the cause of action arose shall pay the first one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) of liability, and the balance of any payment owed shall be paid in accordance with G.S. 143-299.4. If a State agency, otherwise authorized to purchase insurance, purchases a policy of commercial liability insurance providing coverage in an amount at least equal to the limits of the State Tort Claims Act, such insurance coverage shall be in lieu of the State's obligation for payment under this Article. The North Carolina High School Athletic Association, Inc., is a State agency for purposes of this Article, and its liability in tort shall be only under this Article. This subsection does not extend to any independent contractor of the Association. The Association shall be obligated for payments under this Article, through the purchase of commercial insurance or otherwise, in lieu of any responsibility of the State or The University of North Carolina for this payment. The Association shall be similarly obligated to reimburse or have reimbursed the Department of Justice for any expenses in defending any claim against the Association under this Article. Liability in tort of the State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees for noncertifications as defined under G.S. 58-50-61 shall be only under this Article. History (1951, c. 1059, s. 1; 1953, c. 1314; 1955, c. 400, s. 1; c. 1102, s. 1; c. 1361; 1957, c. 65, s. 11; 1965, c. 256, s. 1; 1967, c. 1206, s. 1; 1971, c. 893, s. 1; 1973, c. 507, s. 5; c. 1225, s. 1; 1977, c. 464, s. 34; c. 529, ss. 1, 2; 1979, c. 1053, s. 1; 1987, c. 684, s. 1; 1987 (Reg. Sess., 1988), c. 1087, s. 1; 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 769, s. 19.33(a); c. 777, s. 5(a); 2000-67, ss. 7A(a), 7A(b); 2001-446, s. 5(f); 2007-323, s. 28.22A(o); 2007-345, s. 12.) Cross References. - For similar provision, see Session Laws 1949, c. 1138. As to applicability of Article 31 of Chapter 143 to negligent acts committed by officers, etc., of the State acting pursuant to G.S. 130A-475 et seq., relating to terrorist incidents, see G.S. 130A-478 . For the State Employee Federal Remedy Restoration Act, waiving the sovereign immunity of the State for certain purposes, see G.S. 143-300.35 . Editor's Note. - Session Laws 2001-446, s. 8 provides: "Nothing in this act obligates the General Assembly to appropriate funds to implement this act." Effect of Amendments. - Session Laws 2007-323, s. 28.22A(o), as amended by Session Laws 2007-345, s. 12, effective July 1, 2008, substituted "State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees" for "Teachers' and State Employees' Comprehensive Major Medical Plan" in subsection (d). Legal Periodicals. - For comment on this Article, see 29 N.C.L. Rev. 416 (1951). For note on the right of subrogation under the provisions of this Article, see 32 N.C.L. Rev. 242 (1954). For comment on the construction of this Article, see 33 N.C.L. Rev. 613 (1955). For note on the distinction between intentional and negligent conduct under this Article, see 35 N.C.L. Rev. 564 (1957). For note on the distinction between nonfeasance and misfeasance under this Article, see 36 N.C.L. Rev. 352 (1958). For note on judicial abrogation of the doctrine of municipal immunity to tort liability, see 41 N.C.L. Rev. 290 (1963). For article on recent developments in North Carolina tort law, see 48 N.C.L. Rev. 791 (1970). For note on tort liability of municipal corporations operating public hospitals in this State, see 54 N.C.L. Rev. 1114 (1976). For note on abrogation of contractual sovereign immunity, see 12 Wake Forest L. Rev. 1082 (1976). For survey of 1976 case law dealing with administrative law, see 55 N.C.L. Rev. 898 (1977). For survey of 1977 law on torts, see 56 N.C.L. Rev. 1136 (1978). For note analyzing the civil liability of law enforcement officers in the use of deadly force in North Carolina, see 4 Campbell L. Rev. 391 (1982). For comment on the need for reform in North Carolina of local government sovereign immunity, see 18 Wake Forest L. Rev. 43 (1982). For comment, "The Battle at Little Big Horn Has Moved to Raleigh - Is this Custer's Last Stand Against Tort Reform?," see 10 Campbell L. Rev. 439 (1988). For article, "Liability for Discretionary Decisions of State Officers and Employees Under the North Carolina Tort Claims Act: A Critical Analysis of Hochheiser v. North Carolina Dep't of Transp.," see 18 N.C. Cent. L.J. 143 (1989). For note, "North Carolina's New AIDS Discrimination Protection: Who Do They Think They're Fooling?," see 12 Campbell L. Rev. 475 (1990). For note, "Municipal Liability for Negligent Inspections in Sinning v. Clark - A 'Hollow' Victory for the Public Duty Doctrine," see 18 Campbell L. Rev. 241 (1996). For a survey of 1996 developments in the law regarding prisoner rights, see 75 N.C.L. Rev. 2428 (1997). For note, "Taking One For the Team: Davidson v. University of North Carolina and the Duty of Care Owed by Universities to Their Student-Athletes," see 27 Wake Forest L. Rev. 589 (2002). For article, "Local Governments and the Public Duty Doctrine after Wood v. Guilford," see 81 N.C.L. Rev. 2291 (2003). For comment, " 'Inevitable Inequities:' The Public Duty Doctrine and Sovereign Immunity in North Carolina," see 28 Campbell L. Rev. 271 (2006). For article, "Seeing Through the Smoke and Fog: Applying a Consistent Public Duty Doctrine in North Carolina After Myers v. McGrady," see 85 N.C.L. Rev. 706 (2007).