Shoffner v. Mann

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Shoffner v. Mann

111 S.E.2d 543, 251 N.C. 462, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 588

DecidedDecember 16, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 111 S.E.2d 543 (Shoffner v. Mann) 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.

Bluebook

Shoffner v. Mann, 111 S.E.2d 543, 251 N.C. 462, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 588 (N.C. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

PeR Curiam.

Attention is called to the fact the suit is against the brokers who negotiated the insurance contract and not -against, the Virginia Mutual Insurance Company, the insurer. The right to cancel -is reserved to the insurer. The right to cancel being conceded, it appears any cause of action would be limited to the recovery of the unearned premium. The plaintiff’s evidence -showed he had received credit on another policy for the full amount due him. The plaintiff’s own evidence, therefore, put him out of court.

The judgment of nonsuit is

Affirmed.

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

PeR Curiam.

Attention is called to the fact the suit is against the brokers who negotiated the insurance contract and not -against, the Virginia Mutual Insurance Company, the insurer. The right to cancel -is reserved to the insurer. The right to cancel being conceded, it appears any cause of action would be limited to the recovery of the unearned premium. The plaintiff’s evidence -showed he had received credit on another policy for the full amount due him. The plaintiff’s own evidence, therefore, put him out of court.

The judgment of nonsuit is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E.2d 543, 251 N.C. 462, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shoffner-v-mann-nc-1959.