Wharton v. Home Security Life Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtCoNNOR, J.
Neither Elbert Sprinkle, the original beneficiary, nor the plaintiff, the substituted beneficiary, in the policy of insurance sued on in this action, had an insurable interest in the life of Grace Love, the insured, by reason of their relationship to her, as nephew and niece, respectively. In Hardy v. Ins. Co., 152 N. C., 286, 67 S. E., 767, it is said that it is very generally held that the relationship of uncle and nephew does not of itself create an insurable interest in favor of either. This principle is manifestly applicable to the relationship of aunt and nephew and of aunt and niece.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hardy v. . Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
3Cited by9 opinions
- Beard v. American Agency Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
- Allgood v. Wilmington Savings & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. ReaganSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Carter v. Continental Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Elmore v. Life Ins. Co. of VirginiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.