Legal Opinion
Luckett v. Cowser
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 4, 1968No. 282, 306PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtConnor T. Hansen, J.
The question to be resolved is whether the insurance policy issued to Cowser by Great Lakes Mutual afforded coverage under the facts of this case. The particular policy provision to be considered reads as follows:
“IV Automobile Defined, Trailers, Two or More Automobiles, Including Automatic Insurance.
“(a) Automobile. Except where stated to the contrary, the word ‘automobile’ means:
((
“(4) Newly Acquired Automobile — an automobile, ownership of which is acquired by the named insured who is the owner of the described automobile, if the named insured notifies the company within thirty days…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Quaderer v. Integrity Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Dunmire Motor Co. v. Oregon Mutual Fire InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1941
- Utilities Ins. Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1952
- Filaseta v. Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers' Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Brescoll v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Garriguenc v. LoveWisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
- McPhee v. American Motorists InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- D'ANGELO v. Cornell Paperboard Products Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Vonasek v. Hirsch and Stevens, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
- Laabs v. Chicago Title InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.