Summary

Portrait of Fred M. Vinson Fred M. Vinson King v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America…

The parties agreed that South Carolina law was controlling, but up to the time of the District Court's decision neither of them had located any decision on aviation exclusion clauses by any South Carolina court. The District Court therefore fell back on what it deemed to be general principles of South Carolina insurance law, as enunciated by the State supreme Court: that ambiguities in an insurance contract are to be resolved in favor of the beneficiary, and that the cause of death, within the meaning of accident insurance policies, is the immediate, not the remote cause.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Fred M. Vinson Fred M. Vinson King v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America…

To hold that federal courts must abide by Common Pleas decisions might well put a premium on the financial ability required for exhaustive screening of the judgment rolls or for the maintenance of private records. In cases where the parties could not afford such practices, the result would often be to make their rights dependent on chance; for every decision cited by counsel there might be a dozen adverse decisions outstanding but undiscovered.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature