Legal Opinion
Urhammer v. Olson
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 28, 1968No. 246PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.
Wisconsin law clearly governs the tort aspects of this controversy. Olson and Heritage will be able to have a comparison of negligence with Urham-mer and may seek contribution from him individually. The narrow issue presented on this appeal, therefore, becomes whether State Farm is entitled to assert the family-exclusion clause as a defense to liability under its insurance contract with Mr. Urhammer.
The liability insurance contract in question was written and delivered in Minnesota to Urhammer, a Minnesota resident. Appellants contend that we should apply Wisconsin law to Urhammer’s contract…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Heath v. ZellmerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Tomlyanovich v. TomlyanovichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
- Conklin v. HornerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Zelinger v. State Sand & Gravel Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Peterson v. WarrenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. v. Fairbanks Morse, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Haines v. Mid-Century InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Sybron Transition Corporation v. Security Insurance Company Of HartfordCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- American Standard Insurance v. ClevelandCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1985
- Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance v. WiscombWashington Supreme Court · 1980
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.