Legal Opinion

New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Acorn Products Co.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1969No. 177PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.

The plaintiff contends that Acorn breached its contract with Woerfel by not procuring workmen’s compensation insurance and, therefore, the plaintiff seeks damages equivalent to the sums paid the injured employee.

The defendant contends that the plaintiff, as insurer of Woerfel, is not entitled to subrogation against it. The defendant further asserts that plaintiff is subrogated to only those rights arising under the workmen’s compensation act and concludes that the plaintiff has no right of reimbursement under the act from Acorn.

The defendant is correct in saying that the plaintiff has no…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Patent Scaffolding Co. v. William Simpson Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1967
  2. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Worden-Allen Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Perkins v. WorzalaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
  4. Northwestern National Casualty Co. v. State Automobile & Casualty UnderwritersWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Larsen v. J. I. Case Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1968

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Garrity v. Rural Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Employers Health Insurance v. General Casualty Co. of WisconsinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Ruckel v. GassnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Campion v. Montgomery Elevator Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1992
  5. Bar Steel Construction Corp. v. ReadSupreme Court of Delaware · 1971

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