Legal Opinion

Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided January 21, 1991No. 23317PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harwell, Justice:

This case involves the issue of whether the insurer failed to make a meaningful offer of underinsured coverage to the insured such that the insured is entitled to a reformation of her automobile policies to include such coverage. The trial judge denied reformation as to all four policies. The Court of Appeals reversed the order of the trial judge finding that the insurer had failed to prove that a meaningful offer of underinsured coverage had been made and remanded the case to the trial judge to reform one of the policies to afford underinsured motorist coverage up to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wannamaker Ex Rel. Estate of WannamakerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  2. Dewart v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
  3. Knight v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1988
  4. Jackson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1990

3Cited by8 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. American Security Insurance v. HowardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1993
  4. Elias v. FIREMEN'S INS. CO. OF NEWARK, NJ.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
  5. Holt v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1994

3 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