Legal Opinion

Hanover Insurance v. Horace Mann Insurance

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided February 20, 1990No. 23160PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Gregory, Chief Justice:

This case is before us on a writ of certiorari to review the memorandum decision of the Court of Appeals holding the trial judge erred in granting petitioner’s (Hanover’s) motion for directed verdict. We reverse.

Kelley Parker, a passenger in a car owned by Daniel Loftis, sustained injuries when Loftis’s car was struck by an underinsured motorist. Loftis was insured by respondent (Horace Mann) and had no underinsured motorist coverage. Parker was insured by Hanover and her policy included underinsured motorist coverage. Hanover brought this action to determine whether…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wannamaker Ex Rel. Estate of WannamakerSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  2. Garris v. Cincinnati InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1984
  3. Davis v. State Budget & Control BoardCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1989

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Butler v. Unisun InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1996
  2. Floyd v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  3. Croft Ex Rel. Estate of Croft v. Old Republic InsuranceSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  4. Osborne v. Allstate InsuranceCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1995
  5. Progressive Casualty Insurance v. LeachmanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005

26 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