Wiles v. Mullinax
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSharp, J.
This Court has several times stated the rule applicable to plaintiff’s allegations and evidence:
“It is very generally held that where an insurance agent or broker undertakes to procure a policy of insurance for another, affording protection against a designated risk, the law imposes upon him the duty, in the exercise of reasonable care, to per-from the duty he has assumed and within the amount of the proposed policy he may be held liable for the loss properly attributable to his negligent default.” Elam v. Realty Co., 182 N.C. 599, 602, 109 S.E. 632, 633.
Accord, Equipment Co. v. Swimmer, 259…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Elam v. Smithdeal Realty & InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Elam v. . Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
- Boney, Insurance Comr. v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Bank of French Broad, Inc. v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
- Feldmeyer v. EngelhartSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1928
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Sanchez v. MartinezNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1982
- Musgrave v. Mutual Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
- Mayo v. American Fire & Casualty CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Pittman v. Great American Life Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1974
- Timmerman Ins. Agency, Inc. v. MillerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1969
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.