State ex rel. Unemployment Compensation Commission v. Martin

Stácy, 0. J.

Tbe question for decision is whether tbe employee-claimants (other than tbe boarders) who were not directly interested in tbe labor dispute which brought about tbe stoppage of work, and did not participate in or help finance or benefit from tbe dispute, are disqualified for benefits because they belonged to a grade or class of workers of which, immediately before tbe commencement of tbe stoppage, there were members employed at tbe premises at which tbe stoppage occurred, some of whom (tbe boarders) were participating in or financing or directly interested in tbe dispute. Tbe Superior Court answered in tbe affirmative, and we approve on authority of what was said in tbe case of In re Steelman, 219 N. C., 306 , 13 S. E. (2d), 544 .

It is sought to distinguish tbe present case from tbe Steelman Case on tbe ground that tbe appellants here do not belong to tbe same grade or class of workers as tbe boarders. This was a question of fact which tbe Commission has determined against tbe appellants.

It is provided by G. S., 96-15, that in any judicial proceeding under this section, “tbe findings of the Commission as to tbe facts, if there is evidence to support it, and in tbe absence of fraud, shall be conclusive, and tbe jurisdiction of said court shall be confined to questions of law.”

There is ample evidence to support tbe findings of tbe Commission. Hence, in tbe absence of fraud, and none is alleged here, they are conclusive on appeal to tbe Superior Court and in this Court.

It results, therefore, that tbe judgment of tbe Superior Court must be upheld.

Affirmed.