Legal Opinion

Dailey v. Washington National Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 1935PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cubiam.

Plaintiff's appeal presents two questions:(1) Did the judge's decision contain a statement of facts found and the conclusions of law separately, as required by C. S., 569 ?(2) Are the provisions in the policy limiting defendant’s liability valid ?

Both of these questions must be answered against the plaintiff. In his judgment Judge Williams set out the facts which he found, fully and in detail, and rendered judgment thereon constituting his conclusion of law. Eley v. R. R., 165 N. C., 78. Provisions in policies limiting liability have been upheld in Epps v. Ins. Co., 201 N. C., 695,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Reinhardt v. Life & Casualty InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Eley v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  3. Epps v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Woodard v. MordecaiSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  2. Harrison v. . BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  3. Waters v. HumphreyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977
  4. Glendale Manufacturing Co. v. BonanoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API