Daves v. Union Mutual Insurance

The defendant’s sole contention is that the trial judge should have allowed its motion for nonsuit. Its argument is based on two contentions: one, that the plaintiffs did not comply with the terms of the policy in that they did not file written notice or a sworn proof of loss; and, two, that its uncontradicted evidence shows that the policy of insurance was canceled as of 2 December 1965.

Perhaps the rule of law most often stated in North Carolina is that “On a motion to nonsuit, plaintiff’s evidence is to be taken as true, and all the evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to…