Legal Opinion

Lockhart v. Pilot Life Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 12, 1927PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClarkson, J.

The defendant, Pilot Insurance Co., introduced no evidence, but admitted that it owed the amount of the policy either to plaintiff or the intervener. It made no appeal to this Court. The policy of insurance was not introduced in evidence by any of the litigants. Plaintiff’s main contentions are: “That he was entitled to an instruction that upon the whole evidence he should recover: (a) Having proved by admission of tbe defendant tbat tbe policy was issued; (b) tbat the plaintiff was tbe beneficiary; (c) tbat tbe insured was dead and tbe policy was in full force and effect; (d) tbat tbis…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Central Bank of Washington v. HumeSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
  2. Cotton Mills v. Weil.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
  3. Mitchell v. . TalleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  4. Maynard v. Life Insurance Co. of VirginiaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Russell v. . OwenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
  2. Parker v. . PotterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Wilson v. . WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
  4. McKinney v. . SutphinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  5. Travelers Insurance Company v. KeithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973

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