Legal Opinion

Martin v. Continental Insurance

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided September 3, 1996No. COA95-633PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

In this declaratory judgment action, plaintiffs appeal the trial court’s determination that plaintiff Phyllis Martin (Martin) was not afforded underinsured motorist (UIM) or uninsured motorist (UM) coverage through a fleet policy of insurance issued by defendant Continental Insurance Company (Continental) to Martin’s employer. Two issues are presented by this appeal. The first question concerns whether the fleet policy at hand is governed by North Carolina or Kansas substantive law. We hold, pursuant to clear and controlling precedent, that the instant policy is governed by North…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Page v. SloanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
  2. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Delta & Pine Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Tanglewood Land Co., Inc. v. ByrdSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Sutton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  5. Smith v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Fortune Insurance v. OwensCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  2. Sanders v. American Spirit InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  3. Cananwill, Inc. v. EMAR Group, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1999
  4. Piazza v. LittleCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
  5. Bb&t Boli Plan Tr. v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co.North Carolina Business Court · 2016

6 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