Branch v. Travelers Indem. Co., 378 S.E.2d 748 (N.C. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Branch v. Travelers Indem. Co., 378 S.E.2d 748 (N.C. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
57 citation events (51 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Acker (ncctapp, 2022-04-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Acker
N.C. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
ACKER 2022-NCCOA-211 Opinion of the Court jury reasonably could find that defendant in fact believed that it was necessary to kill his adversary to protect himself from death or great bodily harm, then the defendant is not entitled to have the jury instructed on self-defense.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Acker
N.C. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
ACKER 2022-NCCOA-211 Opinion of the Court jury reasonably could find that defendant in fact believed that it was necessary to kill his adversary to protect himself from death or great bodily harm, then the defendant is not entitled to have the jury instructed on self-defense.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989) (citation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Hooper
N.C. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
“In determining whether there was any evidence of self-defense presented, the evidence must be interpreted in the light most favorable to [the] defendant.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Hooper
N.C. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
“In determining whether there was any evidence of self-defense presented, the evidence must be interpreted in the light most favorable to [the] defendant.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Greenfield
N.C. · 2020 · confidence medium
“In determining whether there was any evidence of self-defense presented, the evidence must be interpreted in the light most favorable to defendant.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989) (citing State v. Gappins, 320 N.C. 64, 71 , 357 S.E.2d 654, 659 (1987)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Greenfield
N.C. · 2020 · confidence medium
“In determining whether there was any evidence of self-defense presented, the evidence must be interpreted in the light most favorable to defendant.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 391 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 752 (1989) (citing State v. Gappins, 320 N.C. 64, 71 , 357 S.E.2d 654, 659 (1987)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Corbett/Martens (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 389 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 751 (1989).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Corbett/Martens (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 2020 · confidence medium
State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 389 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 751 (1989).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) State v. Jacobs
N.C. · 2018 · confidence medium
Therefore, the trial court erred in excluding this evidence pursuant to Rule 412 and there is “a reasonable possibility that, had the error not been committed, a different result would have been reached at trial.” State v. Webster, 324 N.C. 385, 393 , 378 S.E.2d 748, 753 (1989) (citing N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443 (1988)).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Lee
N.C. Ct. App. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Webster , 324 N.C. 385 , 391, 378 S.E.2d 748 , 752 (1989) ("In determining whether there was any evidence of self-defense presented, the evidence must be interpreted in the light most favorable to defendant." (citation omitted) ).
DAVID E. BRANCH, Administrator of the Estate of Cheryl Lynn Branch
v.
THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY and UNIGARD MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
457PA88.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
May 4, 1989.
378 S.E.2d 748
Tucker, Hicks, Hodge and Cranford, P.A., by John E. Hodge, Jr., for plaintiff-appellee. , Wade and Carmichael, by J. J. Wade, Jr., for defendant-appellant.
Frye, Webb, Meyer.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published

Lead Opinion

FRYE, Justice.

The issues in this case are virtually identical to those in Silvers v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., 324 N.C. 289, 378 S.E. 2d 21 (1989), and Parrish v. Grain Dealers Mutual Ins. Co., 324 N.C. 323, 378 S.E. 2d 419 (1989). Factually, this case differs only in that a settlement was reached without a lawsuit after a failed attempt to procure the consent of the underinsured motorist coverage carrier to the settlement. These differences are not material to our disposition of this appeal.

For the reasons fully and aptly stated in Silvers and Parrish, we hold that plaintiffs entry into a settlement with the tortfeasor[*431] without defendant’s consent does not bar his claim for underinsured motorist benefits as a matter of law.

The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. However, the case must be remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the trial court to determine whether defendant was prejudiced by plaintiffs failure to procure its consent to the settlement.

Modified and affirmed.

Dissent

Justice Webb

dissenting.

I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in Silvers v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., 324 N.C. 289, 378 S.E. 2d 21 (1989).

Justice MEYER joins in this dissenting opinion.