Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Fortin

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 9, 1999No. 296PA98PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FRYE, Justice.

In a case of first impression before this Court, we must decide whether there was a valid rejection of underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage for a renewal of a personal auto policy issued subsequent to the effective date of the 1991 amendments to N.C.G.S. § 20-279.21(b)(4), the UIM provision of the Motor Vehicle Safety and Financial Responsibility Act (the Act). The Court of Appeals, affirm*266ing the trial court in this case, held that there was not. For the reasons stated herein, and by our Court of Appeals in Maryland Cas. Co. v. Smith, 117 N.C. App. 593, 452 S.E.2d 318, disc.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sutton v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Smith v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  3. Maryland Casualty Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1995
  4. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance v. CavinessCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Multiple v. North Carolina Department of Health & Human ServicesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
  2. Daniel W. Thomas v. William Ray McDermitt and State Farm Mutual InsuranceWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Erie Insurance Exchange v. MillerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  4. Sanders v. American Spirit InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
  5. Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance v. MartinsonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010

11 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