Willard v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[u]nder Virginia law, Aetna would not be subject to an action in contract on its uninsured motorist endorsement until judgment in tort had been entered against [the uninsured motorist]” (citation omitted)
• “The public policy of this state in this regard is not so compelling as to override the application of the North Carolina direct action provision.”
• “The court of the forum state determines according to its own conflict of laws rules whether a question of law is substantive or procedural.”
• “The court of the forum state determines according to its own conflict of laws rules whether a question of law is substantive or procedural.”
• “Comity does not require the application of another state’s substantive law if it is contrary to the public policy of the forum state”
• “Comity does not require the application of another state’s substantive law if it is contrary to the public policy of the forum state.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).