Charlotte Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. State ex rel. Lanier

Decision Date25 October 1972
Docket NumberNo. 7210SC598,7210SC598
Citation192 S.E.2d 57,16 N.C.App. 381
CourtNorth Carolina Court of Appeals
PartiesCHARLOTTE LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. STATE of North Carolina ex rel. Edwin S. LANIER, Commissioner of Insurance.

Atty. Gen. Robert Morgan and Associate Atty. Gen. Benjamin H. Baxter, Jr., for respondent appellee (North Carolina Commissioner of Insurance).

Cansler, Lockhart & Eller, P.A., by Thomas R. Eller, Jr., and Richard D. Stephens, Charlotte, for petitioner appellant.

HEDRICK, Judge.

We express no opinion as to whether the proposed lease between the insurance company and George H. Talbot, President and Treasurer of the company, would be in violation of the provisions of G.S. § 58--79(b)(3).

Article IV of the North Carolina Constitution provides:

Section 1. Judicial power. The judicial power of the State shall, except as provided in Section 3 of this Article, be vested in a Court for the Trial of Impeachments and in a General Court of Justice. The General Assembly shall have on power to eeprive the judicial department of any power or jurisdiction that rightfully pertains to it as a co-ordinate department of the government, nor shall it establish or authorize any courts other than as permitted by this Article.

Sec. 3. Judicial powers of administrative agencies. The General Assembly may best in administrative agencies established pursuant to law such judicial powers as may be reasonably necessary as an incident to the accomplishment of the purposes for which the agencies were created. Appeals from administrative agencies sahll be to the General Court of Justice.

The General Assembly is empowered to confer on the Commissioner of Insurance only those judicial powers reasonably necessary as an incident to the accomplishment of the purposes for which the Department of Insurance was created. State ex rel. Lanier v. Vines, 274 N.C. 486, 164 S.E.2d 161 (1968).

Express powers delegated by statute and implied powers reasonably necessary for its proper functioning are the only powers which an administrative agency possesses. In Great American Insurance Company v. Gold, 254 N.C. 168, 173, 118 S.E.2d 792, 796 (1961) it is stated, 'Administrative boards have only such authority as is properly conferred upon them by the Legislature.' Thus, it is clear that administrative agencies must find within the statutes justification for any authority which they purport to exercise. In 2 Am.Jur.2d Administrative Law § 463 (1962) it is stated:

'What orders and decisions an administrative agency may make is dependent upon its statutory purposes and powers and the validity of the acts conferring such powers. An order cannot be made without power or authority, or for an unauthorized purpose, and if made without authority it may be regarded as a nullity.'

The Commissioner of Insurance of North Carolina is charged with the duty under G.S. § 58--9 with administering the laws of the State with regard to the insurance industry. Specific powers and duties are statutorily conferred upon the Commissioner to aid him in the administration of the insurance laws. G.S. § 58--38 provides:

'If, upon examination, the Commissioner of Insurance is of the opinion that any domestic insurance company is insolvent, or has exceeded its powers, or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • IN RE DECLARATORY RULING BY COM'R OF INS.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • July 6, 1999
    ...the insurance laws of the State, and does not confer any other express powers or duties. Charlotte Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. State ex rel. Lanier, 16 N.C.App. 381, 384, 192 S.E.2d 57, 59 (1972) ("The Commissioner of Insurance of North Carolina is charged with the duty under G.S. s 58-9 with ......
  • Petruzzo v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • May 22, 2015
    ...Regarding 11 N.C.A.C. 12.0319, 134 N.C.App. 22, 28–29, 517 S.E.2d 134 (1999) ; see also Charlotte Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. North Carolina ex rel. Lanier, 16 N.C.App. 381, 384, 192 S.E.2d 57 (1972) (noting that the provision of the Insurance Law authorizing the Commissioner to "adopt ... rul......
  • Discovery Ins. Co. v. N.C. Dep't of Ins.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 3, 2017
    ...losses arising out of claims handling."Discovery cites two cases it asserts are analogous to the case at bar. Charlotte Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. State ex rel. Lanier dealt with whether the Commissioner of Insurance had the authority to enforce an insurance rule by issuing a letter ordering ......
  • Whittington v. North Carolina Dept. of Human Resources
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 1990
    ...state must justify any authority which administrative agencies purport to exercise. Charlotte Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lanier, Comr. of Insurance, 16 N.C.App. 381, 384, 192 S.E.2d 57, 59 (1972). There is no such justification from the General Statutes in the case at Second, in Genera......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT