Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA EX. REL., COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE v. NORTH CAROLINA AUTOMOBILE RATE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, LUMBERMEN'S MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, THE SHELBY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN MOTORISTS INSURANCE COMPANY, AND AMERICAN MUTUAL LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY

Insurance 79.1 — automobile liability rate filing — disapproval without hearing The Commissioner of Insurance had no authority to disapprove an automobile liability insurance rate filing without first conducting a public hearing. G.S. 58-27.2.

On 1 July 1975 defendant, Rate Office, filed with the Commissioner of Insurance a proposal for a 15.9% increase in premium rates for automobile liability insurance. The filing was accompanied by supporting statistical exhibits. On 25 September 1975 the Commissioner issued an order providing that the filing was "disapproved" and that a public hearing on the filing would be held on 30 October 1975. Defendants appealed from the Commissioner's order.

HEDRICK, Judge.

G.S. 58-27.2 provides in pertinent part:

"Whenever any statutory or licensed insurance rating bureau . . . making its own rate filings makes any proposal to revise an existing rating schedule, the effect of which is to increase or decrease the charge for insurance . . . and such rating schedules are subject to the approval of the Commissioner, such bureau . . . shall file its proposed change and supporting data with the Commissioner who shall thereafter, before acting upon any such proposal, order a public hearing thereon . . . ."

The record before us demonstrates that the Commissioner of Insurance did not "order a public hearing" before taking action disapproving the "filing" of 1 July 1975. The Commissioner had no authority to disapprove the proposed rates without conducting a public hearing. The order appealed from is vacated and the cause is remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings as by law required.

Vacated and remanded.

Judges MORRIS and ARNOLD concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

COMMISSIONER OF INS. v. AUTOMOBILE RATE OFFICE
(Apr 1, 1976)