Legal Opinion
Kamikawa v. Keskinen
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided November 25, 1969No. 142PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
Was the automobile liability insurance in effect on the day of the accident by virtue of the agent’s statement to the insured that if he sent the premium in he was covered ?
The plaintiff-appellant points out that in Wisconsin the court has long recognized the validity of an oral contract of insurance.
In Kiviniemi v. American Mut. Liability Ins. Co. (1930), 201 Wis. 619, 629, 231 N. W. 252, it is stated:
“Should one before starting on an automobile trip orally request ah agent to renew a policy about tó expire issued by the agent on his automobile and be assured that it would be attended to,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kiviniemi v. American Mutual Liability InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Schuster v. Germantown Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Shearer v. Dunn County Farmers Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Campbell v. WilsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Utica Mutual Insurance v. Klein & Son, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1990
- Nugent v. SlaghtCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
- Stueck v. Le DucWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2012
- Madgett v. Monroe County Mutual Tornado InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.