Legal Opinion

Heilig v. Home Security Life Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 4, 1942PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUeNNT, J.

The first assignment of error is to the refusal of his Honor to sustain defendant’s motion for judgment as of nonsuit. “On motion to nonsuit, the plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of every fact and inference of fact pertaining to the issues involved which may reasonably be deduced from the evidence.” Gorham v. Ins. Co., 214 N. C., 526, 200 S. E., 5.

The evidence offered by the plaintiff was properly submitted to the jury. The evidence of the plaintiff and defendant was conflicting, but the jury adopted the plaintiff’s version as to the facts and circumstances under wbicb tbe policy of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fishblate v. Fidelity Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Gorham v. . Insurance Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Laughinghouse v. Great National InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. Short v. LaFayette Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  5. Follette v. . Accident AssociationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Northern National Life Insurance v. Lacy J. Miller MacHine Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
  2. Jones v. Home Security Life Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  3. Thomas-Yelverton Co. v. State Capital Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  4. Hicks Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Home Security Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. Durham v. Quincy Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984

13 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