In re: HouseÂ, 245 N.C. App. 388

Claimant House was involuntarily sterilized on 27 November 1974 under state eugenics laws.
Industrial Commission found coercion by a Social Services worker and that the procedures occurred during hospitalization for abortion.
North Carolina enacted the Eugenics Asexualization and Sterilization Compensation Program in 2013 to compensate involuntary sterilizations.
Program defines a “qualified recipient” as someone involuntarily sterilized under the Eugenics Board’s authority and in accordance with 1933 or 1937 public laws.
The record shows no petition to the Eugenics Board, no notice or hearing, and no Board order; the sterilization occurred outside the Board process.
Court held the plain language of § 143B-426.50(5) is unambiguous and claimant did not meet the statutory requirements for compensation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether claimant qualifies under §143B-426.50(5).	House was involuntarily sterilized under Board authority.	No Board petition or Board compliance; not within the statute.	Not a qualified recipient under the statute.
Whether compliance with Eugenics Act procedures is required for compensation.	Procedural issues do not affect compensation.	Compensation requires Board procedures under the Eugenics Act.	Procedural compliance not met; compensation denied.
How plain meaning affects the interpretation of §143B-426.50(5).	Statutory language should be interpreted broadly to aid claimants.	Statute unambiguous; must be applied as written.	Statute is clear and unambiguous; must be applied as written.

Correll v. Division of Social Services, 332 N.C. 141 (N.C. 1992) (statutory interpretation begins with plain language; unambiguous statutes require no construction)