Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1989

Branch v. Travelers Indemnity Company

Branch v. Travelers Indemnity Company
Supreme Court of North Carolina · Decided May 4, 1989 · Frye, Webb, Meyer
378 S.E.2d 748; 324 N.C. 430; 1989 N.C. LEXIS 244 (South Eastern Reporter, Second Series)

Branch v. Travelers Indemnity Company

Opinion of the Court

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 *431without 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.

Dissenting Opinion

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.