Legal Opinion

South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Courtney

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

Decided July 24, 2000No. 3228PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHULER, Judge:

In this declaratory judgment action, the trial court found the automobile insurance policy on a replacement vehicle was not “similar” insurance sufficient to invoke the automatic termination clause in the replaced vehicle’s policy. South Carolina Farm Bureau appeals. We affirm.

FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In the summer of 1997, William Courtney owned two automobiles, a 1997 Saturn and a 1995 Chevrolet Camaro. Farm Bureau insured both vehicles in separate policies. Each policy contained personal liability and underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) in limits of $100,000 per person and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Diamond State Insurance v. Homestead Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
  2. Walker v. Queen Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
  3. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Auto World of Orangeburg, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1999
  4. Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1996
  5. United Fire & Casualty Co. v. VictoriaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Auto-Owners Insurance v. BenjaminCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2015
  2. Ohio Casualty Insurance v. Dentek, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
  3. South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. CourtneySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  4. SC FARM BUREAU MUT. INS. v. CourtneyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API