Case Name: AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellants
Court: Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jurisdiction: South Carolina
Decision Date: 1972-09-19
Citations: 259 S.C. 306
Docket Number: 19489
Parties: AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellants
Judges: 
Reporter: South Carolina Reports
Volume: 259
Pages: 306–308

Head Matter:
19489
AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellants
(191 S. E. (2d) 720)
Messrs. Love, Thornton, Arnold & Thomason, and Haynsworth, Perry, Bryant, Marion & Johnstone, all of Greenville, for Appellants,
Messrs. Leatherwood, Walker, Todd & Mann, of Green-ville, for Respondent,
September. 19, 1972.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The question in this case is whether the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act (Sections 46-750. 31 (2) and 46-750.32, Supplement to the 1962 Code of Laws) requires that automobile liability insurance policies issued in this State provide coverage for a minor, unmarried son of an insured and resident of her household, while driving a vehicle not listed in the policy. The lower court held that such coverage was not required by the statutes.
The judgment under appeal is affirmed under the decision in Crenshaw v. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Company, S. C., 191 S. E. (2d) 718, filed this date.