Legal Opinion

Manning v. Fletcher

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 2, 1991No. 907SC150PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COZORT, Judge.

The question presented by the case below is whether, upon remand from our Supreme Court, the trial court properly calculated the amount due plaintiff Arthur Manning under defendant’s insurance policy providing underinsured motorist coverage. Finding the court erred in calculating the amount due, we reverse the trial court.

Plaintiff Arthur Manning was injured in an automobile accident on 13 March 1985. He suffered severe physical injuries, including complete loss of bladder and sexual function. In March 1986 Arthur and his wife Lugene Manning (the Mannings) initiated an action…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Silvers v. Horace Mann InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Proctor v. North Carolina Farm Bureau Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  3. Silvers v. Horace Mann InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  4. Manning v. FletcherSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  5. Allen v. RupardCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Greenfield v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2007
  2. Radzisz v. Harley Davidson of Metrolina, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  3. Bailey v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  4. Patrick v. RONALD WILLIAMS, PACourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
  5. Hairston v. HarwardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2018

7 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