Legal Opinion

Olander v. Klapprote

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1953PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.

It is not claimed that the'policydoes not afford plaintiff protection in the event that Klapprote is found guilty of actionable negligence. Nor is it claimed that the second paragraph of the quoted provision is effective. Appellant’s contention is that it and Studey had the right to contract that in the event his automobile be operated by a person under the age of twenty-five years the insured would reimburse appellant for any loss suffered by the insurer arising out of the negligent operation of the car by an operator who had not reached that age.

The right to limit an insurer’s liability by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Jones v. Preferred Accident Insurance Co. of New YorkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Ottens v. Atlas Assurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Perkins v. PerkinsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955
  2. Prisuda v. General Casualty Co. of AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Travelers Insurance Co. v. American Fidelity & Cas. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1958
  4. Resseguie v. American Mutual Liability InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Rural Mutual Insurance v. PetersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1986

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API