Legal Opinion
Degenhardt-Wallace v. Hoskins, Kalnins, McNamara & Day, Ivars Kalnins, & Great American Insurance
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
Decided October 28, 2004No. 03-3091PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHigginbotham, J.
¶ 1. This case involves an insurance dispute and requires us to interpret language in an underinsured motorist (UIM) policy that obligates the UIM carrier to pay benefits to its insured only after the underinsured motorist's liability limits "have been exhausted by payment of judgments or settlements." The question is whether the policy's exhaustion requirement can be satisfied by a judgment or settlement with someone other than the alleged tortfeasor.
¶ 2. Hoskins, Kalnins, McNamara & Day, Attorney Ivars Kalnins and Great American Insurance Company (collectively Kalnins) appeal from an order…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wirth v. EhlyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Folkman v. QuammeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
- Danbeck v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GilletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
- Oaks v. American Family Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Degenhardt-Wallace v. Hoskins, Kalnins, McNamara & Day, Ivars Kalnins, & Great American InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
- J&J Fish on Center Street Inc v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2022
- Lindsey v. Southern Farm BureauDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 2009