Woodard v. North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WELLS, Judge.
Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court erred in failing to grant its motions for a directed verdict and for judgment NOV. Defendant contends that these motions should have been granted because: (1) The Woodards, at trial, never proved their employee was negligent, and therefore the Woodards’ liability to Kimsey and defendant’s derivative liability to reimburse the Woodards was never established; and (2) as a matter of law, damage to Kimsey’s building arose out of a “completed operations hazard” which was excluded from coverage under the terms of the insurance policy. We…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. ChantosSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Daniel v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
3Cited by5 opinions
- Goodwin v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- Shelter Mutual Insurance v. GardnerDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1995
- Tart v. American National Fire Insurance Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Woodard v. NC FARM BUREAU MUT. INS. CO.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
- Deason v. J. King Harrison Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997