Jenkins v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Supreme Court of North Carolina
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
- Thigpen v. Jefferson Standard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Boozer v. . Assurance SocietySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Carter v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935
- Hill v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- 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
- Gregory v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Ireland v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Bradley v. PritchardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
- Drummonds v. THE EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- 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.