Cunningham v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtDecker, J.
Michael Cunningham (Cunningham) appeals from a judgment that respondent Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., (Metropolitan) had a subrogated interest in the settlement proceeds of Cunningham’s wrongful death action because the coverage of Metropolitan’s policy constituted an indemnity policy. Cunningham con tends that the policy is an investment policy and that, therefore, in the absence of an express subrogation clause, there is no subrogation by operation of law. We disagree and affirm, holding, in light of Rixmann v. Somerset Public Schools, 83 Wis. 2d 571, 266 N.W.2d 326 (1978), that the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Heifetz v. JohnsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Gatzweiler v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1908
- Patitucci v. GerhardtWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Rixmann v. Somerset Public SchoolsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Paper MacHinery Corp. v. Nelson Foundry Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1982
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cunningham v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Cunningham v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Cunningham v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Opinion No. (1995), Oklahoma Attorney General Reports1995