Legal Opinion

Peerless Insurance Co. v. Manson

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkie, J.

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether a foreign stock insurance company, by reinsuring a portion of its risks with a Wisconsin mutual insurance company, becomes a policyholder-member so as to be liable for assessment.

It is conceded that the reinsurance treaties were silent on whether Peerless was a “policyholder” or “member” and on the entire subject of what liability, if any, Peerless had for *603an assessment by Federal. Any liability of Peerless for the instant assessment did not arise by contract but must be imposed by the provisions of ch. 201, Stats. 1957,1 which deal with…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Shakman v. United States Credit System Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Aetna, C., Co. v. International, C., Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  3. Pella Farmers Mutual Insurance v. Hartland Richmond Town InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Cunningham v. Republic InsuranceTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Royal Ins. Co. v. Vanderbilt Ins. Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1899

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Foremost Life Insurance v. Department of InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1980
  2. In Re Liquidations of Reserve Ins. Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1988
  3. American Re-Insurance v. WashburnIllinois Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Foremost Life Insurance v. Department of InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API