Legal Opinion

Sears v. Maryland Casualty Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1941PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBakNHILL, J.

On its appeal the defendant challenges the correctness of the ruling of the court below in permitting the proof over objection of the statutes of Virginia relating to Motor Vehicle Liability policies and contends that in any event the statute has no extraterritorial application. Interesting as these questions may be, we may pass them without discussion or decision and come to the exception to the refusal of the court to dismiss as of nonsuit. This exception is based primarily upon the contention that the court below misinterpreted the contract of insurance. We may decide the question thus…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Small Ex Rel. Balthis v. MorrisonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
  2. Brustein v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. Lavine v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
  4. Peeler v. United States Casualty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  5. Bakker v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Alford v. Textile Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
  2. MacClure v. Accident & Casualty Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  3. Hardware Mutual Casualty v. SameCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942
  4. Maxey v. American Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1942
  5. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Indemnity Insurance Co. of North AmericaSupreme Court of Virginia · 1947

3 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