Legal Opinion
Borntreger v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided February 23, 2012No. 2011AP703PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundsten, P.J.
¶ 1. This appeal concerns a commercial general liability insurance policy that provided coverage for a farm owned by Maurice and Gail Smith. While the policy was in effect, a worker on the Smiths' farm, Enos Borntreger, was injured on the job and sued the Smiths. A dispute arose between the Smiths and their insurer, Auto-Owners. The Smiths and Auto-Owners dispute whether the Auto-Owners' policy provides coverage for the damages sought by Borntreger. The circuit court granted summary judgment to Auto-Owners based on a provision in the policy that excluded coverage for liabilities arising from…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Folkman v. QuammeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1995
- American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. TickleMissouri Court of Appeals · 2003
- Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. Mike Ross, Inc.District Court, N.D. West Virginia · 2006
- Hawkeye-Security Insurance v. City of RhinelanderCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Central Mutual Insurance v. True Plastics, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2013
- Canal Insurance v. National House Movers, LLCCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 2015
- Dickau v. DickauCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2012
- Lafayette Insurance Company v. Jerry S. RobertsCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2013