Legal Opinion

Baysdon v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 10, 1963No. 175PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.

Appellant Nationwide’s assignments of error require us to decide whether the findings of fact support and justify the con- ’elusion of the trial court that the Great American and Home policies “were not in force at the time of the loss.”

Nationwide admits that its policy was in force. The Great American and Home policies were issued for five year terms which had not expired at the time of the loss. The premium installment on the Great American policy was thirty-two days past due, and on the Home policy fifty-eight days past due. But there is no automatic suspension or forfeiture of insurance…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Glens Falls Insurance v. Founders' InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  2. Scheel v. German-American InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  3. H. M. Wade Manufacturing Co. v. LefkowitzSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Roberta Manufacturing Co. v. Royal Exchange Assurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  5. Daniels v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Wilks v. Allstate Insurance CompanyLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1967
  2. MFA Mutual Insurance Co. v. Southwest Baptist College, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1964
  3. Lee v. Ohio Casualty Insurance Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1978
  4. Copley v. Pekin Insurance Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Ector v. American Liberty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976

20 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