Fox v. Catholic Knights Insurance Society
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Dissent
WEDEMEYER, EJ.
¶ 26. (dissenting). I write separately from the majority because I believe the trial court correctly ruled that Wis. Stat. § 631.11(3) does not apply to this case, and that because the blood was not drawn from Patrick until after he died, the life insurance policy did not go into effect.
¶ 27. This is a significant case in the development of insurance law as it is the first Wisconsin case to interpret Wis. Stat. § 631.11(3). I conclude that the majority has incorrectly interpreted the statute. Although the unusual and unfortunate circumstances presented in this case generate…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- UFE Inc. v. Labor & Industry Review CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. SweatWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
- Kocinski v. Home Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1990
- Kocinski v. Home Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988
- Brown v. Equitable Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.