Stillman v. North River Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOwen, J.
This is an action to recover on a fire insurance policy. The defense is that the policy was forfeited by reason of the removal of the insured property to a different location without the written consent of the company indorsed on the policy. The policy covered certain household goods “only while contained in or attached to the two-story shingle-roof frame building occupied for dwelling purposes, situated at 55 North Portland street, city of Fond du Lac, state, of Wisconsin.” The policy also contained this provision:
“No one shall have power to waive any provision or condition of this policy…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Joliffe v. Madison Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Erdmann v. Mutual Insurance Co. of the Order of Herman's Sons of WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- McQuillan v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
- Spohn v. National Fire Insurance Co. of HartfordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
- Farmers Mutual Insurance v. Home Fire InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Schuster v. Germantown Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Klingler v. Milwaukee Mechanics InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1927
- Emmco Insurance v. Palatine InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
- Struebing v. American InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- Schlee v. New Zealand Insurance Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1927
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.