Fehl v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company
This text of 133 S.E.2d 68 (Fehl v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
For a full analysis of the case® in which liability is upheld or denied on the ground the use of the insured vehicle' 'at the time of an accident wag with or was without the owner’s permission, see Hawley v. Ins. Co., 257 N.C. 381, 126 S.E. 2d 161. In this case, Harris had permission to drive the Buick seven miles to his home but he was instructed to> return it within two and one-half hours. Actually he drove 70 miles to Rocky Mount where he spent the night. While driving the vehicle more 'than 20 hours after’ he should 'have surrendered it, he became involved in the accident in which the plaintiff sustained her injuries. These fact® show a major — not a minor — deviation from the permitted uise. The rules to which this Court is committed (Hawley) require us to hold Harris’s use at the time of the accident was without the .permission of the owner. Consequently the defendant’s policy does not cover plaintiff’® injury. The judgment of the Superior Court of Wake County is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
133 S.E.2d 68, 260 N.C. 440, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fehl-v-aetna-casualty-surety-company-nc-1963.