Legal Opinion
Ray v. Austin
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided August 16, 2010No. 26858PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*608Justice HEARN.
In this case, we decide whether Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, doing business as Kemper Insurance Company (“Lumbermens”), made a meaningful offer of underinsured motorist coverage (“UIM”) to Cintas Corporation (“Cintas”). We find a meaningful offer was made and affirm the circuit court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Lumbermens.
FACTUAL/PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Cintas began purchasing automobile insurance from Lumbermens through the insurance brokerage firm of Aon Risk Services Incorporated (“Aon”) in 1989. In 1991, Cintas designated Kevin Ryan as its agent to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Fleming v. RoseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wannamaker Ex Rel. Estate of WannamakerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
- David v. McLeod Regional Medical CenterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2006
- Lanham v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of South Carolina, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
- Butler v. Unisun InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Traynum v. ScavensSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2016
- Cohen v. Progressive Northern InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2013
- Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance v. McKnightDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2015
- Ethel Powell v. State Farm Fire and CasualtyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019
- Freligh v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2021
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.