Legal Opinion
Peterson v. Royal Insurance Company
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided October 14, 1959No. 175PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.
The policy, so far as pertinent to this controversy, provides: “. . . the coverage of this policy is extended to include direct loss by . . . explosion . . .”
“PROVISIONS APPLICABLE ONLY TO EXPLOSION: Loss by explosion shall include direct loss resulting from the explosion of accumulated gases or unconsumed fuel within the firebox (or combustion chamber) of any fired vessel or within the flues or passages which conduct the gases of combustion therefrom. However, this Company shall not be liable for loss by explosion, rupture or bursting of: (a) steam boilers, steam pipes, steam turbines or…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lane v. BryanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Jersey Insurance Company of New York v. Charles J. Heffron, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
- Wall v. TrogdonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Bolich v. Provident Life & Accident InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
- Polansky v. Millers' Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Honeymead Products Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
- Jackson v. American Mutual Fire InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1968
- Pre-Cast Concrete Products, Inc. v. The Home Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Pre-Cast Concrete Products, Inc. v. Home InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- Pottash v. Merchants & Business Men's Mutual Fire Ins., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1961