Aetna Insurance v. Government Employees Insurance

191 S.E.2d 720, 259 S.C. 306
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedSeptember 19, 1972
Docket19489
StatusPublished

This text of 191 S.E.2d 720 (Aetna Insurance v. Government Employees Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Aetna Insurance v. Government Employees Insurance, 191 S.E.2d 720, 259 S.C. 306 (S.C. 1972).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The question in this case is whether the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act (Sections 46-750. 31 (2) and 46-750.32, Supplement to the 1962 Code of Laws) requires that automobile liability insurance policies issued in this State provide coverage for a minor, unmarried son of an insured and resident of her household, while driving a vehicle not listed in the policy. The lower court held that such coverage was not required by the statutes.

[308]*308The judgment under appeal is affirmed under the decision in Crenshaw v. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Company, S. C., 191 S. E. (2d) 718, filed this date.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Crenshaw Ex Rel. Crenshaw v. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance
191 S.E.2d 718 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
191 S.E.2d 720, 259 S.C. 306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aetna-insurance-v-government-employees-insurance-sc-1972.