Marlowe v. RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, Judge.
To say the least, the procedure in this case was unusual. After the parties had stipulated that the judge try the case without a jury, they then proceeded with a jury trial. A judgment was entered wherein the trial judge found facts and made conclusions of law as though there had been no jury trial and then allowed a motion for a directed verdict and dismissed the three actions. Thus, a combination trial was conducted, which is novel.
Despite the novel procedure, we do not find any error in the result obtained.
The stipulated facts and the uncontradicted evidence show:
1. Jackie…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Jamestown Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Brevard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
3Cited by7 opinions
- Quiñones López v. Manzano PozasSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1996
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. AllisonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
- Hawaiian Insurance & Guaranty Co. v. Federated American InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1975
- Wilson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Monin v. Peerless InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.