Honeycutt v. Walker, 463 S.E.2d 236 (N.C. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Honeycutt v. Walker, 463 S.E.2d 236 (N.C. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1997 · …the main purpose of the 1991 amendments to g.s. 20-279.21(b)(4) appears to be the prohibition of intrapolicy stacking of uim coverage ⚠ not in text
47 citation events (31 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: NC Farm Bureau, Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bost (ncctapp, 1997-04-15)
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) NC Farm Bureau, Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bost (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 1997 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence low
the main purpose of the 1991 amendments to g.s. 20-279.21(b)(4) appears to be the prohibition of intrapolicy stacking of uim coverage
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
HONEYCUTT
v.
WALKER
No. 266P95.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Nov 2, 1995.
463 S.E.2d 236
Published
1 passages pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 66%
Citer courts: Court of Appeals of North Caro… (2)

Petition by defendant (N.C. Farm Bureau) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 2 November 1995.