Williams v. GEICO

Docket Number27435
Decision Date20 August 2014

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
56 cases
  • Portrait Homes - S.C. v. Pa. Nat'l Mut. Cas. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 24 d3 Abril d3 2024
    ...App. 2009). [73–75] Whether a contract’s language is ambiguous is a question of law for the court. Williams v. Gov’t Emps. Ins. Co. (GEICO), 409 S.C. 586, 594, 762 S.E.2d 705, 710 (2014). "The construction of a clear and unambiguous contract is a question of law for the court to determine."......
  • Hoyler v. State
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • 7 d3 Agosto d3 2019
    ...of the parties' intent is then a question of fact." (emphasis added) (citations omitted)); Williams v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co. (GEICO) , 409 S.C. 586, 594, 762 S.E.2d 705, 710 (2014) ("If the court decides [a contract's] language is ambiguous, ... evidence may be admitted to show the inten......
  • Neumayer v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • 24 d3 Julho d3 2019
    ...an insured's breach of a notice clause cannot reduce the amount of available coverage. Further, the court cited to this Court's decision in Williams , where we held a family step-down provision was void under section 38-77-142(C) because it purported to reduce coverage from the policy's lia......
  • Advance Tr. & Life Escrow Servs. v. Protective Life Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 1 d5 Março d5 2024
    ...816 (S.C. 1983)). Contract language in an insurance policy must be given its plain and ordinary meaning. Williams v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 409 S.C. 586, 762 S.E.2d 705, 709-10 (2014); Bell, 757 S.E.2d at 406; Sloan Constr. Co. v. Cent. Nat'l Ins. Co. of Omaha, 269 S.C. 183, 236 S.E.2d 818, ......
  • Get Started for Free
4 books & journal articles
  • § 2.2 Ambiguous Terms
    • United States
    • Guide to South Carolina Liability and Property Insurance Law (SCBar) Chapter 2 Interpreting Insurance Policies
    • Invalid date
    ...with you. It includes your unmarried and unemancipated child away at school."41 -------- Notes:[13] Williams v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co., 409 S.C. 586, 594-595, 762 S.E.2d 705, 710 (2014); S.C. Dept' of Natural Res. v. Town of McClellanville, 345 S.C. 617, 623, 550 S.E.2d 299, 302-303 (2001......
  • § 2.1 General Rules of Policy Language Construction
    • United States
    • Guide to South Carolina Liability and Property Insurance Law (SCBar) Chapter 2 Interpreting Insurance Policies
    • Invalid date
    ...S.E.2d 85, 91 (Ct. App. 2011); Evanston Ins. Co. v. Watts, 52 F. Supp. 3d 761, 774 (D.S.C. 2014).[6] Williams v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co., 409 S.C. 586, 594, 762 S.E.2d 705, 709-710 (2014); Hawkins v. Greenwood Dev. Corp., 328 S.C. 585, 592, 493 S.E.2d 875, 878 (Ct. App. 1997).[7] McGill v.......
  • Step-down or Step-on?
    • United States
    • South Carolina Bar South Carolina Lawyer No. 33-4, January 2022
    • 1 d6 Janeiro d6 2022
    ...Aug. 20, 2014), rev'd, 427 S.C. 348, 831 S.E.2d 131 (Ct. App. 2019), rev'd, 433 S.C. 206, 858 S.E.2d 150 (2021). [11] Id. [12] Id. [13] 409 S.C. 586, 762 S.E.2d 705 (2014). [14] Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Walls, 427 S.C. 348, 358, 831 S.E.2d 131, 137 (Ct. App. 2019), rev'd, 433 S.C. 2......
  • III. South Carolina Financial Responsibility Requirements
    • United States
    • The Law of Automobile Insurance in SC (SCBar) Chapter 1 Regulation of the Automobile Insurance Business
    • Invalid date
    ...Mutual Casualty Ins. v. Parker, 282 S.C. 546, 551, 320 S.E.2d 458, 461 (Ct. App. 1984).[173] Williams v. Government Employees Ins. Co, 409 S.C. 586, 762 S.E.2d 705 (2014); Ferguson v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co, 254 S.C. 235, 174 S.E.2d 768 (1970).[174] S.C. Code Ann. §§ 56-10-10; 56-10-2......