South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. Courtney
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
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
- Diamond State Insurance v. Homestead Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
- Walker v. Queen Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Auto World of Orangeburg, Inc.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1999
- Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1996
- United Fire & Casualty Co. v. VictoriaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Auto-Owners Insurance v. BenjaminCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2015
- Ohio Casualty Insurance v. Dentek, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2003
- South Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. CourtneySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- SC FARM BUREAU MUT. INS. v. CourtneyCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2000