Legal Opinion

Dewart v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided August 1, 1988No. 1203PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bell, Judge:

This is an action in equity for reformation of an insurance contract. Angela W. Dewart seeks to include underinsured motorist coverage in her written contract of insurance with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company as a remedy for State Farm’s alleged failure to comply with Section 1, Act No. 569, Acts and Joint Resolutions of the General Assembly of South Carolina, Regular Session, 1978, 60 Stat. at Large 1668. That statute required automobile insurance carriers to offer their insureds optional underin-sured motorist coverage up to the limits of insured liability…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Holman v. All Nation Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wannamaker Ex Rel. Estate of WannamakerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  3. Hastings v. United Pacific Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Jacobson v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  5. Squier v. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Butler v. Unisun InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  2. Ackerman v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1995
  3. Todd v. Federated Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  4. American Security Insurance v. HowardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
  5. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. JamesonDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2006

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API