Legal Opinion · Dissent

Emmco Insurance v. Palatine Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 5, 1953Published

1DissentGehl, J.

We of the minority consider it unnecessary to labor through texts and the opinions of courts of other jurisdictions in search of the answer to the question presented upon this appeal. It is found in the policy which provides:

“This policy does not apply: . . .
“(b) Under any of the coverages, while the automobile is subject to any bailment lease, conditional sale, mortgage or other incumbrance not specifically declared and described in this policy;”

and in Moe v. Allemannia Fire Ins. Co. 209 Wis. 526, 244 N. W. 593. The essential facts in the Moe Case are identical with those with which we have…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Bostwick v. Mutual Life Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Welch v. Fire Ass'n of PhiladelphiaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Vankirk v. Citizens' Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Flamingo v. City of WaukeshaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Olson v. Herman Farmers Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1925

12 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