Vernon v. Harleysville Mutual Casualty Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that insurer’s UM endorsement, which excluded coverage where there was “other insurance,” was an invalid “limitation upon the statutory coverage required by [the South Carolina UM Act]”
• presuming the legislature, in adopting an amendment to a statute, intended to make some change in the existing law
• presuming the legislature, in adopting an amendment to a statute, intended to make some change in the existing law
• noting it is presumed the Legislature, in adopting an amendment to a statute, intended to make some change in the existing law
• noting it is presumed the Legislature, in adopting an amendment to a statute, intended to make some change in the existing law
• it will be presumed in adopting an amendment to a statute that the Legislature intended to make some change in the existing law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).