{
  "id": 8919224,
  "name": "LORYN HERRING, a minor by RAYMOND M. MARSHALL, her Guardian Ad Litem, and BESSIE HERRING, Plaintiffs v. RONALD LINER, Defendant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Herring ex rel. Marshall v. Liner",
  "decision_date": "2004-04-06",
  "docket_number": "No. COA03-552",
  "first_page": "534",
  "last_page": "540",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "163 N.C. App. 534"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "592 S.E.2d 694",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        12631140,
        12631141,
        12631142
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2004,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/se2d/592/0694-03",
        "/se2d/592/0694-01",
        "/se2d/592/0694-02"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "358 N.C. 156",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        12631142,
        12631143,
        12631144,
        12631145,
        12631146,
        12631147,
        12631149
      ],
      "year": 2004,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/se2d/592/0694-02",
        "/se2d/592/0696-03",
        "/se2d/592/0696-01",
        "/se2d/592/0696-02",
        "/se2d/592/0697-01",
        "/se2d/592/0698-02",
        "/se2d/592/0699-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "431 S.E.2d 22",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1993,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "333 N.C. 790",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2549288,
        2548138,
        2546705,
        2548280,
        2546877
      ],
      "year": 1993,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/333/0790-05",
        "/nc/333/0790-04",
        "/nc/333/0790-03",
        "/nc/333/0790-02",
        "/nc/333/0790-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "426 S.E.2d 451",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "456"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "109 N.C. App. 152",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8524720
      ],
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "160"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/109/0152-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "542 S.E.2d 205",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "351 N.C. 350",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        1155840,
        1155802,
        1155946,
        1155926
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/351/0350-04",
        "/nc/351/0350-01",
        "/nc/351/0350-03",
        "/nc/351/0350-02"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "518 S.E.2d 814",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "817"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "135 N.C. App. 92",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11239160
      ],
      "year": 1999,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "95"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/135/0092-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "577 S.E.2d 310",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "314"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "156 N.C. App. 564",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9191523
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "569-70"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/156/0564-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "581 S.E.2d 119",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "121"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "158 N.C. App. 526",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9188390
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "529"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/158/0526-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "146 S.E.2d 410",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1966,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "416"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "266 N.C. 430",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8561069
      ],
      "year": 1966,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "438"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/266/0430-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "388 S.E.2d 557",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "568",
          "parenthetical": "citing Woods, 295 N.C. at 505-06, 246 S.E.2d at 777"
        },
        {
          "page": "568"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "326 N.C. 133",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        5309422
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1990,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "151",
          "parenthetical": "citing Woods, 295 N.C. at 505-06, 246 S.E.2d at 777"
        },
        {
          "page": "151"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/326/0133-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "428 S.E.2d 238",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "241"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "109 N.C. App. 506",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8525862
      ],
      "year": 1993,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "512"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/109/0506-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "350 S.E.2d 66",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "68",
          "parenthetical": "citing Trust Co., 276 N.C. at 355, 172 S.E.2d at 522-23"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "318 N.C. 534",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4732740
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "538",
          "parenthetical": "citing Trust Co., 276 N.C. at 355, 172 S.E.2d at 522-23"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/318/0534-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "172 S.E.2d 518",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1970,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "522-23"
        },
        {
          "page": "522-23"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "276 N.C. 348",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8561396
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1970,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "355"
        },
        {
          "page": "355"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/276/0348-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "155 S.E.2d 501",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "271 N.C. 158",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8562816
      ],
      "year": 1967,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/271/0158-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "246 S.E.2d 773",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 4,
      "year": 1978,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "777"
        },
        {
          "page": "777"
        },
        {
          "page": "777"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "295 N.C. 500",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8564714
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1978,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "505"
        },
        {
          "page": "505-06"
        },
        {
          "page": "505-06"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/295/0500-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "348 S.E.2d 794",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "796"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "318 N.C. 378",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        4736888
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1986,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "380"
        },
        {
          "page": "380"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/318/0378-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "524 S.E.2d 558",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "563",
          "parenthetical": "quoting Fidelity Bankers Life Ins. Co. v. Dortch, 318 N.C. 378, 380, 348 S.E.2d 794, 796 (1986)"
        },
        {
          "page": "563"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "351 N.C. 293",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        1155833
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "299",
          "parenthetical": "quoting Fidelity Bankers Life Ins. Co. v. Dortch, 318 N.C. 378, 380, 348 S.E.2d 794, 796 (1986)"
        },
        {
          "page": "299"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/351/0293-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "573 S.E.2d 538",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2002,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "541"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "154 N.C. App. 357",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9250072
      ],
      "year": 2002,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "361"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/154/0357-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "581 S.E.2d 88",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "91-92"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "158 N.C. App. 423",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9187947
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "427"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/158/0423-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "534 S.E.2d 660",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "664"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "139 N.C. App. 778",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9497849
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "784-85"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/139/0778-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "458 S.E.2d 187",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1995,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "340 N.C. 359",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        790083,
        790182,
        790069,
        790070,
        790172
      ],
      "year": 1995,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/340/0359-05",
        "/nc/340/0359-02",
        "/nc/340/0359-01",
        "/nc/340/0359-03",
        "/nc/340/0359-04"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "454 S.E.2d 826",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1995,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "828"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "118 N.C. App. 178",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11917278
      ],
      "year": 1995,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "181"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/118/0178-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "591 S.E.2d 520",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2004,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "358 N.C. 137",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2984985
      ],
      "year": 2004,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/358/0137-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "555 S.E.2d 280",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2001,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "354 N.C. 371",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        138403,
        138376,
        138473,
        138511,
        138363
      ],
      "year": 2001,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/354/0371-02",
        "/nc/354/0371-04",
        "/nc/354/0371-05",
        "/nc/354/0371-01",
        "/nc/354/0371-03"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "544 S.E.2d 600",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2001,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "603"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "143 N.C. App. 106",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11433394
      ],
      "year": 2001,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "108"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/143/0106-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "582 S.E.2d 343",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "345"
        },
        {
          "page": "345"
        },
        {
          "page": "345"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "158 N.C. App. 705",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9189113
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 2003,
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "707-08"
        },
        {
          "page": "708"
        },
        {
          "page": "708"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/158/0705-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "545 S.E.2d 423",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "352 N.C. 673",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        684888,
        685037,
        685029
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/352/0673-03",
        "/nc/352/0673-01",
        "/nc/352/0673-02"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "529 S.E.2d 458",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "137 N.C. App. 680",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11095610
      ],
      "year": 2000,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/137/0680-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 790,
    "char_count": 15230,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.75,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.8044689553034444e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7168836870412136
    },
    "sha256": "55974c16337234196b2163e212d3990aeac6cfcf17fc6c01b49b552a54ee54da",
    "simhash": "1:d322c46a46373853",
    "word_count": 2491
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:27:37.331987+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges WYNN and McGEE concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "LORYN HERRING, a minor by RAYMOND M. MARSHALL, her Guardian Ad Litem, and BESSIE HERRING, Plaintiffs v. RONALD LINER, Defendant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "TYSON, Judge.\nLoryn Herring (\u201cLoryn\u201d), through her guardian ad litem, and her mother, Bessie Herring (\u201cHerring\u201d) (collectively, \u201cplaintiffs\u201d), appeal from an order granting Ronald Liner\u2019s (\u201cLiner\u201d) motion for summary judgment. We affirm.\nI. Background\nOn 3 June 1998, plaintiffs sued the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Board of Education and Liner (collectively, \u201cdefendants\u201d) for negligence, negligent supervision, and constructive fraud based on breach of fiduciary duty. This Court heard the appeal 30 March 2000 and held that sovereign immunity barred plaintiffs\u2019 claims. Herring v. Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Bd. of Educ., 137 N.C. App. 680, 529 S.E.2d 458, disc. rev. denied, 352 N.C. 673, 545 S.E.2d 423 (2000). We incorporate the facts from that opinion here and include additional facts necessary for this appeal. Id.\nOn 4 December 2001, plaintiffs moved to set aside the order granting summary judgment in favor of Liner only, based on the discovery of a separate and additional insurance policy that was not before the superior court or this Court when the initial summary judgment motion or appeal was heard. Employers Reinsurance Corporation had issued an insurance policy (\u201cthe policy\u201d) to the North Carolina Association of Educators under which Liner was an insured at the time of the accident. Plaintiffs\u2019 motion to set aside the judgment regarding Liner only was granted on 31 January 2002. Liner filed a new motion for summary judgment on 7 November 2002, which was granted on 9 December 2002. Plaintiffs appeal.\nIn January 1995, Loryn was eight years old and attended Lewisville Elementary School in the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School System. Loryn was violently attacked and beaten by three male students who were also riding on the school bus with her. The following morning, Herring went to Loryn\u2019s school and complained. She initially spoke with the principal, who directed her to speak with Liner, the assistant principal. Liner refused to expel or suspend the boys suspected in the attack on Loryn. In an affidavit, Herring claimed that Liner wrote and signed a note in her presence that changed Loryn\u2019s bus stop. Herring claims that she never requested a change in Loryn\u2019s bus stop. Liner claimed, in his affidavit, that Loryn\u2019s stop was changed due to Herring\u2019s specific request.\nTo reach the new bus stop, Loryn was required to cross a heavily traveled street. On the morning of 6 June 1995, Loryn was hit by an automobile as she crossed the street on the way to her bus stop. Loryn suffered serious injuries, including permanent brain damage. At the time of Loryn\u2019s injury, no school bus was approaching, present, or waiting at the bus stop. Liner was not present at the bus stop.\nII. Issues\nThe issues are whether the trial court erred in: (1) construing the policy to deny coverage when an exception to the exclusion existed and (2) granting summary judgment when genuine issues of material fact existed.\nTIT. Standard of Review for Summary Judgment,\nOur standard of review from the grant of a motion for summary judgment is whether any genuine issue of material fact exists and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Draughon v. Harnett Cty. Bd. of Educ., 158 N.C. App. 705, 707-08, 582 S.E.2d 343, 345 (2003), (citing Willis v. Town of Beaufort, 143 N.C. App. 106, 108, 544 S.E.2d 600, 603, disc. rev. denied, 354 N.C. 371, 555 S.E.2d 280 (2001)), aff\u2019d, 358 N.C. 137, 591 S.E.2d 520 (2004); see N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 1A-1, Rule 56(c) (2003).\nA defendant may show entitlement to summary judgment by \u2018(1) proving that an essential element of the plaintiffs case is nonexistent, or (2) showing through discovery that the plaintiff cannot produce evidence to support an essential element of his or her claim, or (3) showing that the plaintiff cannot surmount an affirmative defense.\u2019\nDraughon, 158 N.C. App. at 708, 582 S.E.2d at 345 (quoting James v. Clark, 118 N.C. App. 178, 181, 454 S.E.2d 826, 828, disc. rev. denied, 340 N.C. 359, 458 S.E.2d 187 (1995)).\n\u201c \u2018Once the party seeking summary judgment makes the required showing, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to produce a forecast of evidence demonstrating specific facts, as opposed to allegations, showing that he can at least establish a prima facie case at trial.\u2019 \u201d Draughon, 158 N.C. App. at 708, 582 S.E.2d at 345 (quoting Gaunt v. Pittaway, 139 N.C. App. 778, 784-85, 534 S.E.2d 660, 664 (2000)).\nIV. Insurance Policy Coverage\nA. Sovereign Immunity\nPlaintiffs argue that Liner\u2019s sovereign immunity is waived by an exception to the exclusion of coverage existing in the policy. We disagree.\nSovereign immunity protects the State and its agents from suit. Ripellino v. N.C. School Bds. Ass\u2019n, 158 N.C. App. 423, 427, 581 S.E.2d 88, 91-92 (2003), cert. denied, 358 N.C. 156, 592 S.E.2d 694 (2004). A county or city board of education is a governmental agency and its employees are not ordinarily liable in a tort action unless the board has waived its sovereign immunity. Id. N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 115C-42 (2003) provides the only means by which a board of education may waive its sovereign immunity. Lucas v. Swain Cty. Bd. of Educ., 154 N.C. App. 357, 361, 573 S.E.2d 538, 541 (2002). This statute states,\n[a]ny local board of education, by securing liability insurance as hereinafter provided, is hereby authorized and empowered to waive its governmental immunity from liability for damage by reason of death or injury to person or property caused by the negligence or tort of any agent or employee of such board of education when acting within the scope of his authority or within the course of his employment. Such immunity shall be deemed to have been waived by the act of obtaining such insurance, but such immunity is waived only to the extent that said board of education is indemnified by insurance for such negligence or tort.\nN.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 115C-42. The mere purchase of a liability insurance policy by a board of education is insufficient to waive sovereign immunity. Id. Immunity is only waived to the extent that the liability insurance policy actually indemnifies the board of education or its employees. Id.\nHere, under the \u201cvehicle usage\u201d section of the policy insuring Liner, any incidents arising from \u201c[t]he ownership, operation, use, loading or unloading of (a) vehicles of any kind . ...\u201d by which the insured would normally be liable are excluded from coverage. Liner contends that this exclusion applies here and that sovereign immunity bars plaintiffs\u2019 claims.\nB. Exceptions to Exclusions\nPlaintiffs argue that the policy specifically carves out an exception to this exclusion and waives Liner\u2019s sovereign immunity. The exception states, \u201can insured who is supervising students entering or exiting a school bus\u201d is not excluded from liability despite the \u201cvehicle usage\u201d exclusion cited by Liner, (emphasis supplied).\nC. Construing Insurance Contracts\n\u201c \u2018[A]n insurance policy is a contract and its provisions govern the rights and duties of the parties thereto.\u2019 \u201d Gaston County Dyeing Machine Co. v. Northfield Ins. Co., 351 N.C. 293, 299, 524 S.E.2d 558, 563 (2000) (quoting Fidelity Bankers Life Ins. Co. v. Dortch, 318 N.C. 378, 380, 348 S.E.2d 794, 796 (1986)). When we construe provisions of an insurance policy, \u201cthe goal of construction is to arrive at the intent of the parties when the policy was issued.\u201d Woods v. Insurance Co., 295 N.C. 500, 505, 246 S.E.2d 773, 777 (1978). The language in the policy is to be construed as written \u201cwithout rewriting the contract or disregarding the express language used.\u201d Fidelity Bankers Life Ins. Co., 318 N.C. at 380, 348 S.E.2d at 796 (citing Industrial Center v. Liability Co., 271 N.C. 158, 155 S.E.2d 501 (1967)).\n\u201c [Exclusions from, conditions upon and limitations of undertakings by the [insurance] company, otherwise contained in the policy, are . . . construed strictly ... to provide coverage.\u201d Trust Co. v. Insurance Co., 276 N.C. 348, 355, 172 S.E.2d 518, 522-23 (1970). \u201c[Provisions which exclude liability of insurance companies are not favored and therefore all ambiguous provisions will be construed against the insurer....\u201d State Capital Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 318 N.C. 534, 538, 350 S.E.2d 66, 68 (1986) (citing Trust Co., 276 N.C. at 355, 172 S.E.2d at 522-23). \u201cWhere a policy defines a term, that definition is to be used. If no definition is given, non-technical words are to be given their meaning in ordinary speech, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning was intended.\u201d Gaston County Dyeing Machine Co., 351 N.C. at 299, 524 S.E.2d at 563 (quoting Woods, 295 N.C. at 505-06, 246 S.E.2d at 777). In determining the ordinary meaning of a word, it is appropriate to look to dictionary definitions. Guyther v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 109 N.C. App. 506, 512, 428 S.E.2d 238, 241 (1993). Our Supreme Court has held that \u201c[u]se of the plain, ordinary meaning of a term is the preferred construction.\u201d C.D. Spangler Constr. Co. v. Industrial Crankshaft & Eng. Co., 326 N.C. 133, 151, 388 S.E.2d 557, 568 (1990) (citing Woods, 295 N.C. at 505-06, 246 S.E.2d at 777).\nD. Defining the Terms of the Exception\nThe determinative issue at bar is the meaning of the exception \u201cis supervising students entering or exiting a school bus.\u201d The term \u201csupervising\u201d is not specifically defined in the policy and therefore must be given its ordinary and usual meaning. Id. Plaintiffs argue that the definition in Black's Law Dictionary, Rev. 4th ed., (1968), which defines one meaning of \u201csupervise\u201d as \u201cto have general oversight over some activity,\u201d should be applied. Our Supreme Court has held that in construing the ordinary and plain meaning of disputed terms, \u201c \u2018standard, nonlegal dictionaries\u2019 \u201d should be used as a guide. C.D. Spangler Constr. Co., 326 N.C. at 151, 388 S.E.2d at 568 (quotingInsurance Co. v. Insurance Co., 266 N.C. 430, 438, 146 S.E.2d 410, 416 (1966)). We have routinely referred to the American Heritage Dictionary in determining the ordinary and usual meaning of non-technical words contained in insurance policies. Id.; see Kennedy v. Haywood Cty., 158 N.C. App. 526, 529, 581 S.E.2d 119, 121 (2003); Norton v. SMC Bldg., Inc., 156 N.C. App. 564, 569-70, 577 S.E.2d 310, 314 (2003); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Chatterton, 135 N.C. App. 92, 95, 518 S.E.2d 814, 817 (1999), disc. rev. denied, 351 N.C. 350, 542 S.E.2d 205 (2000); Durham City Bd. of Education v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 109 N.C. App. 152, 160, 426 S.E.2d 451, 456, disc. rev. denied, 333 N.C. 790, 431 S.E.2d 22 (1993).\nThe American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1982), defines \u201csupervise\u201d as \u201c [t] o direct and inspect the performance of; superintend.\u201d Under this definition, the ordinary meaning of \u201csupervising\u201d is the directing and inspecting of the performance of a particular activity, not the general oversight of that activity as plaintiffs contend. The term \u201cis,\u201d the present tense, third-person form of \u201cbe,\u201d expresses a \u201ccontinuous action.\u201d Id. Thus, the entire phrase \u201cis supervising students entering or exiting a school bus,\u201d taken as a whole, based upon the ordinary meanings of \u201cis\u201d and \u201csupervise,\u201d requires Liner to be actively directing or inspecting students as they are actually entering or exiting school buses in order to waive his sovereign immunity. Id. General oversight over school buses is not sufficient to waive sovereign immunity when analyzing the exception as a whole.\nPlaintiffs argue that Liner changed Loryn\u2019s bus stop causing the injuries that were sustained when she was struck by a vehicle crossing the street. As assistant principal, Liner was responsible for the discipline of students, including disciplining students for inappropriate conduct on a school bus. Liner denies that his duties included assigning bus stops or changing bus stops. Regardless of whether Liner actually changed Loryn\u2019s bus stop, this conduct does not meet the conduct necessary under the policy\u2019s exception to waive sovereign immunity. Neither Liner nor a school bus were present at the time Loryn was crossing the street on the way to her bus stop. He did not direct her to cross the street at the time she was struck nor did he watch over her while she was crossing the street. Liner had no immediate or active control over Loryn as she crossed the street and was struck by the vehicle. At the time of the accident, Loryn\u2019s school bus was neither approaching the bus stop, within sight from the bus stop, nor at the bus stop.\nTaking plaintiffs\u2019 allegations as true, Liner\u2019s conduct of merely changing Loryn\u2019s assigned bus stop is insufficient to satisfy the language of the exception that he \u201cis supervising students entering or exiting a school bus\u201d in the policy. Liner\u2019s actions fail to meet the requirements of the plain meaning of the exception to the vehicle usage exclusion. Plaintiffs\u2019 claim is barred by sovereign immunity. In light of our holding, we do not reach plaintiffs\u2019 second assignment of error.\nV. Conclusion\nPlaintiffs failed to show that Liner\u2019s actions were within the policy\u2019s exception, \u201cis supervising students entering or exiting a school bus,\u201d to waive his sovereign immunity. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nJudges WYNN and McGEE concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "TYSON, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Harold L. Kennedy, III and Harvey L. Kennedy, for plaintiffs-appellants.",
      "Pinto Coates Kyre & Brown, PLLC, by Richard L. Pinto and Martha P. Brown, for defendant-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LORYN HERRING, a minor by RAYMOND M. MARSHALL, her Guardian Ad Litem, and BESSIE HERRING, Plaintiffs v. RONALD LINER, Defendant\nNo. COA03-552\n(Filed 6 April 2004)\nImmunity\u2014 sovereign \u2014 insurance\u2014assistant principal \u2014 exception to vehicle usage exclusion\nThe trial court did not err in a negligence, negligent supervision, and constructive fraud based on breach of fiduciary duty case by granting defendant assistant principal\u2019s motion for summary judgment in a case where a student was hit by a car while crossing the street to get to her new bus stop even though plaintiffs contend defendant waived the defense of sovereign immunity based on an exception to the vehicle usage exclusion in the pertinent insurance policy regarding an insured who is supervising students entering or exiting a school bus, because: (1) defendant had to be actively directing or inspecting students as they were actually entering or exiting school buses in order to waive his sovereign immunity, and general oversight over school buses was not sufficient to waive sovereign immunity; and (2) regardless of whether defendant actually changed the student\u2019s bus stop, this conduct did not meet the conduct necessary under the policy\u2019s exception to waive sovereign immunity when neither defendant nor a school bus were present at the time the student was crossing the street on the way to her bus stop, defendant did not direct the student to cross the street at the time she was struck, nor did he watch over her while she was crossing the street, and defendant had no immediate or active control over the student as she crossed the street and was struck by the vehicle.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from order entered 12 December 2002 by Judge L. Todd Burke in Forsyth County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 24 February 2004.\nHarold L. Kennedy, III and Harvey L. Kennedy, for plaintiffs-appellants.\nPinto Coates Kyre & Brown, PLLC, by Richard L. Pinto and Martha P. Brown, for defendant-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0534-01",
  "first_page_order": 564,
  "last_page_order": 570
}