{
  "id": 4152760,
  "name": "HUBER ENGINEERED WOODS, LLC v. CANAL INSURANCE COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Huber Engineered Woods, LLC v. Canal Insurance",
  "decision_date": "2010-10-08",
  "docket_number": "No. 168A10",
  "first_page": "413",
  "last_page": "414",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "364 N.C. 413"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "690 S.E.2d 739",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2010,
      "opinion_index": -1
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 183,
    "char_count": 2157,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.741,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.332454135339103e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3890180469981068
    },
    "sha256": "e3d8e9fd90236547a3d08676f049c69913dc70e40565e0ec7c631a622e36561f",
    "simhash": "1:6c4f77bf2821a5ca",
    "word_count": 348
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:08:37.384656+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "HUBER ENGINEERED WOODS, LLC v. CANAL INSURANCE COMPANY"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nFor the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals holding that defendant has a duty to defend plaintiff in the underlying action at issue. We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals vacating the portion of the trial court\u2019s order of summary judgment that found defendant has a duty to indemnify plaintiff in the underlying action. This case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the Superior Court, Mecklenburg County, for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.\nAFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Robinson Bradshaw & Hinson, RA., by R. Steven DeGeorge, for plaintiff-appellee.",
      "Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP, by Robert D. Moseley, Jr., pro hac vice, C. Fredric Marcinak III, Sidney S. Eagles, Jr., and Elizabeth Brooks Scherer, for defendant-appellant.",
      "Nexsen Pruet, PLLC, by James W. Bryan and E. Taylor Stakes, for Trucking Industry Defense Association, amicus curiae."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "HUBER ENGINEERED WOODS, LLC v. CANAL INSURANCE COMPANY\nNo. 168A10\n(Filed 8 October 2010)\nInsurance\u2014 commercial automobile liability policy \u2014 trucking company \u2014 no duty to defend manufacturer\nA decision by the Court of Appeals that a trucking company\u2019s commercial automobile liability insurer was required under the terms of its policy to defend and indemnify plaintiff manufacturer in a wrongful death action by the estate of a deceased truck driver who was fatally injured in a fall from his truck while attempting to secure a tarp over a load of plywood at plaintiff manufacturer\u2019s plant was reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting Court of Appeals opinion that plaintiff is not an \u201cinsured\u201d under the trucking company\u2019s policy and that an employee exclusion clause in the policy applied to bar coverage to plaintiff.\nAppeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 203 N.C. App.-, 690 S.E.2d 739 (2010), affirming in part and vacating in part an order of summary judgment entered on 15 December 2008 by Judge Jesse B. Caldwell, III in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Supreme Court 8 September 2010.\nRobinson Bradshaw & Hinson, RA., by R. Steven DeGeorge, for plaintiff-appellee.\nSmith Moore Leatherwood LLP, by Robert D. Moseley, Jr., pro hac vice, C. Fredric Marcinak III, Sidney S. Eagles, Jr., and Elizabeth Brooks Scherer, for defendant-appellant.\nNexsen Pruet, PLLC, by James W. Bryan and E. Taylor Stakes, for Trucking Industry Defense Association, amicus curiae."
  },
  "file_name": "0413-01",
  "first_page_order": 507,
  "last_page_order": 508
}