## Facts

- Larry Gordon Braxton, a North Carolina resident, worked as a plumber’s helper for Dubberly & Son Plumbing, a North Carolina subcontractor on a shopping center project in Franklin, Virginia.
- Bailey and Associates, Inc., a North Carolina corporation, was the general contractor; Anco Electric, Inc., also a North Carolina corporation, was the electrical subcontractor.
- Braxton alleged he contacted an exposed electrical wire while climbing a ladder at the Virginia jobsite, suffered an electric shock, and fell.
- Braxton alleged Anco negligently exposed the wire and negligently installed, inspected, or used electrical equipment, and failed to warn of the danger.
- Braxton received benefits under the North Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act.
- Braxton then filed a North Carolina negligence action against Anco seeking compensatory and punitive damages.

## Issues

1. Whether Virginia or North Carolina workers’ compensation law governs whether Braxton’s third-party negligence action against a separate subcontractor is barred by workers’ compensation exclusivity.
2. Whether Virginia’s “statutory employer” bar to tort suits is properly treated as a tort rule applied under lex loci delicti or as part of workers’ compensation exclusivity, implicating conflicts principles (including renvoi).

## Decision

- The North Carolina Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals and reversed the trial court’s dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6).
- The court held that North Carolina law governs the workers’ compensation exclusivity question for this North Carolina worker who received North Carolina benefits.
- Because North Carolina’s exclusivity provisions did not immunize Anco as Braxton’s statutory employer, Braxton’s negligence action was not barred and could proceed.

## Legal Principles

- A bar to common-law tort recovery that arises from workers’ compensation “exclusive remedy” provisions is treated as part of workers’ compensation law, not merely as general tort substantive law automatically controlled by lex loci delicti.
- When a North Carolina employee is covered by, and receives benefits under, the North Carolina Workers’ Compensation Act for an injury incurred while temporarily working out of state, North Carolina has a strong interest in applying its statute to determine the scope of exclusivity and third-party actions.
- In resolving multistate workers’ compensation exclusivity questions, a forum court may consider the place-of-injury state’s whole law (including its conflicts approach); if that approach points to the compensation state’s law, the forum may apply that law (renvoi).
- Under North Carolina workers’ compensation law, an injured employee may sue a separate subcontractor in negligence when that subcontractor is not the employee’s statutory employer under the Act.

## Conclusion

The court held that North Carolina workers’ compensation law controlled whether exclusivity barred Braxton’s negligence claim, and because Anco was not protected as his statutory employer under North Carolina law, the tort action was allowed to proceed despite the out-of-state injury.


Braxton v. Anco Elec., Inc., 330 N.C. 124, 409 S.E.2d 914 (1991)