Legal Opinion

Jenkins v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 30, 1942PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinborne, J.

This is the question decisive of this appeal: Is there evidence, taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff, that plaintiff was totally and permanently disabled within the express language of the certificate or policy of insurance? A negative answer comes from recent decisions of this Court in Thigpen v. Ins. Co., 204 N. C., 551, 168 S. E., 845; Boozer v. Assurance Society, 206 N. C., 848, 175 S. E., 175; Hill v. Ins. Co., 207 N. C., 166, 176 S.. E., 269; Carter v. Ins. Co., 208 N. C., 665, 182 S. E., 106; Lee v. Assurance Society, 211 N. C., 182, 189 S. E., 626; and Medlin v. Ins. Co.,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Thigpen v. Jefferson Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  2. Boozer v. . Assurance SocietySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Carter v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
  4. Hill v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  5. Medlin v. Mutual Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gregory v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  2. Ireland v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  3. Bradley v. PritchardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  4. Drummonds v. THE EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. Fair v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957

4 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