Potts v. Farmers Mutual Automobile Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
The existence of a cause of action in plaintiff’s favor is dependent upon the terms of the insurance contract. Was the Insurance Company required under its policy issued to the Fox Motor Company to protect the driver of the car obtained from the Fox Motor Company, against damages for injury to' a third person? If the driver of the described car has a right to such protection, then the plaintiffs may recover from the defendant damages to the extent of the insurance; but if the driver is not so protected, either because of a breach of the contract or a lack of coverage, then they have no valid…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Buckner v. BucknerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Hunt v. DollarWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- Bachhuber v. BoosalisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
- Holzinger v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
- Roehrich v. Holt Motor Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
3Cited by9 opinions
- Harper v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
- Zuppa v. Hertz CorporationNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1970
- Bryan v. NobleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Hodge v. LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANYSupreme Court of Virginia · 1962
- Johnson v. Heritage Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.