Legal Opinion

Stuart v. Winnie

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 5, 1935PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFRitz, J.

The first error assigned is that the court erred in striking the designation “The Western Insurance Com*300panies” from the title of the action, as it was stated by the court on the form submitted to the jury for a special verdict. In the summons and in the complaints, which were served on one Rice, a general claim agent of the Western Casualty & Surety Company, the plaintiffs designated, as a party defendant, “The Western Insurance Companies,” which plaintiffs alleged was a foreign corporation that had issued an automobile liability policy to the defendant Winnie. His answers promptly denied…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Trautmann v. Charles Schefft & Sons Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Callies v. Reliance Laundry Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1925

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Lantis v. CondonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
  2. White v. LunderWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Schwartz v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Lansburgh & Bro. v. ClarkCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1942
  5. McKee v. NeilsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1968

6 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