Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Gillette

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided May 24, 2001No. 00-0637PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHue, J.

¶ 1. The issue on appeal is whether, as a matter of law, the appellants, Gillette and Ostlund, are entitled to uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits pursuant to policies of motor vehicle insurance issued by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm). The trial court, in granting summary judgment, held that the tortfeasor's vehicle was not uninsured under the language of the policy, and that Gillette and Ostlund had not used up the limits of liability of the tortfeasor's policy, a prerequisite for claiming the underinsured benefits of the insurance policy. The trial…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Garriguenc v. LoveWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Sahloff v. Western Casualty & Surety Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Hull v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Katze v. Randolph & Scott Mutual Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Brownelli v. McCaughtryCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1994

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GilletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Affordable Erecting, Inc. v. Neosho Trompler, Inc.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
  3. Sec. Health Plan of Wis. Inc. v. Am. Standard Ins. Co. of Wis.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2018
  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GilletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API