Legal Opinion

Lanferman v. Maryland Casualty Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1936PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The following opinion was filed June 2, 1936 :

Fowler, J.

The appellant concedes that, under its contract reserving to itself absolute control of litigation, if its decision not to settle the Tomasik case that it defended for the plaintiff was made in bad faith, it must respond in damages to the plaintiff. Hilker v. Western Automobile Ins. Co. 204 Wis. 1, 231 N. W. 257, 235 N. W. 413. Its main contention is that the jury’s finding of bad faith in failing to come to an agreement with the plaintiff’s attorneys for settlement of the case within the policy limits is not .supported by the evidence.

Th…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hilker v. Western Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Brown v. Guarantee InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  2. Kranzush v. Badger State Mutual Casualty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Berk v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Norwood v. Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
  5. A.W. Huss Company v. Continental Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984

9 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