Legal Opinion

Dewease v. Travelers Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 1935PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeviN, J.

It is unnecessary to decide whether there was sufficient evidence to go to the jury that plaintiff was wholly disabled within the meaning of the policy, as the judgment of nonsuit must be sustained upon other grounds.

The language of the policy of insurance sued on in the instant case, as interpreted by this Court in construing similar provisions in Johnson v. Ins. Co., 207 N. C., 512; Hundley v. Ins. Co., 205 N. C., 780, and Modlin v. Woodmen of the World, ante, 576, in the light of the evidence offered here, compels the conclusion that the failure to furnish proof or notice of any bind to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bergholm v. Peoria Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. Hundley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  3. Ammons v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  4. Johnson v. Missouri State Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1935

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Boseman v. Connecticut General Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Muncie v. Travelers Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Gorham v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  4. FIRST NAT. BANK OF ANSON CTY. v. Nationwide Ins.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  5. Lineberger v. Security Life & Trust CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

16 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