Moherek v. Tucker
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDay, J.
This appeal presents the question, is a passenger of an automobile who is standing behind such auto, holding its spare tire up against its rear bumper to protect the rear bumper of such car from the front bumper of a second car that is about to push it, “occupying” the first auto so as to be covered by its uninsured motorist insurance? The policy in question defined “occupying” as “in or upon, entering into or alighting from” the insured vehicle. We conclude under the facts in this case that the plaintiff-appellant Rudolph P. Moherek was “upon” the vehicle at the time the injury occurred.
On…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Amidzich v. Charter Oak Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Madden v. Farm Bureau Mutual Automobile Ins.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1948
- Wolf v. American Casualty Co. of Reading, PennsylvaniaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1954
- Allstate Insurance v. FlaumenbaumNew York Supreme Court · 1970
- Leatherman v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Tata v. NicholsTennessee Supreme Court · 1993
- Kentucky Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. McKinneyKentucky Supreme Court · 1992
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. GoudeauTexas Supreme Court · 2008
- Stafford Trucking, Inc. v. State, Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1981
- City of Milwaukee v. LindnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.