Legal Opinion

Henderson v. Rochester American Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 29, 1961No. 165PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodmaN, J.

The provisions of liability insurance policies imposing as conditions to liability the duty of insured to give notice of accidents and cooperation in the defense of actions which might result in a judgment against insured are, except where otherwise provided by statute, binding on the parties. Properly interpreted, they will be enforced. Muncie v. Insurance Co., 253 N.C. 74; Peeler v. Casualty Co., 197 N.C. 286, 148 S.E. 261.

The provisions are to be given a reasonable interpretation to accomplish the purpose intended, that is, to put insurer on notice and afford it an opportunity to make such…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State Automobile Mut. Ins. Co. of Columbus v. YorkCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1939
  2. MacClure v. Accident & Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Cowell v. Employers Indemnity Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1930
  4. Muncie v. Travelers Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Peeler v. United States Casualty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1929

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. M.F.A. Mutual Insurance v. CheekIllinois Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Great American Insurance v. C. G. Tate Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Davenport v. Travelers Indemnity CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  4. Fortress Re, Inc. v. Jefferson Ins. Co. of NYDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1978
  5. Galinko v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983

18 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