Legal Opinion · Dissent

Grimsley v. Nelson

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1994No. 943SC145Published

1Dissent

Judge Wynn

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent because I believe that the uninsured motorist (UM) coverage statute does not permit a direct action by plaintiffs against their UM carrier, the consequence of the majority’s holding. I believe the better procedure would be to remand this case to the trial court for a determination of whether plaintiffs should be permitted to serve defendant Leroy Jerome Nelson in accordance with N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 6.

The procedural history of this case is rather complex. On 4 June 1989, plaintiff Marlene R. Grimsley was injured in a automobile accident when…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Lemons v. Old Hickory Council, Boy Scouts of America, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  2. Silvers v. Horace Mann InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  3. Brown v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Guthrie v. RaySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  5. Harrington v. RiceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957

7 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