1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 143 S.E.2d
  5. 143 S.E.2d 70 (1965)
 

HORN v. PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

No. 33.

143 S.E.2d 70 (1965)

264 N.C. 157

George R. HORN v. PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 23, 1965.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Van Winkle, Walton, Buck & Wall, Herbert L. Hyde, Asheville, for defendant appellant.

Hamrick & Jones, Rutherfordton, for plaintiff appellee.

RODMAN, Justice.

The first and principal question debated in the briefs and on oral argument is directed to the motion to nonsuit. Defendant asserts the court's ruling was erroneous for two reasons:

First, plaintiff alleged, and defendant denied, that proof of loss required by the policy had been given. Plaintiff must establish compliance with policy provisions to recover, and proof of loss is a condition precedent. If this case had been

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases