State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Geline
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRobert W. Hansen, J.
Is the attorney for the plaintiff in a personal injury action entitled to a fee from subrogated insurers paid out of a settlement of the case?
Parties in interest. Involved in the determination of the issue presented are: (1) The plaintiffs, here the Conovers, acting for themselves and their children; (2) their attorney, here Max E. Geline, practicing attorney in Milwaukee county; and (3) the subrogated insurers, here State Farm and Associated Hospital Service.
Retainer agreement. To collect their claim for their damages the plaintiffs retained the attorney agreeing to pay “one-third (Yn) of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United Services Automobile Association v. HillsNebraska Supreme Court · 1961
- Krause v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1969
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. ElkinsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1970
- Associated Hospital Service, Inc. v. Milwaukee Automobile Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Commercial Union Insurance v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Baier v. State Farm Insurance Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1977
- Travelers Insurance Co. v. WilliamsTennessee Supreme Court · 1976
- Barreca v. CobbSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1996
- Baier v. State Farm InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
- Pena v. ThoringtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1979
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.