Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Fontana Builders, Inc. v. Assurance Company of America

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 2016No. 2014AP000821Published

1ConcurrenceAnn Walsh Bradley, J.

¶ 70. (concurring). I agree with the majority that interpretation of the insurance polices at issue presents a question of law. Majority op., ¶ 5. I also agree that Fontana Builders, Inc. (Fontana) had a reasonable expectation that the builder's risk policy would persist while construction continued.

¶ 71. Further, I share the majority's concern over potential purchasers being able to unilaterally termi*534nate a builder's risk policy and agree that Fontana's builder's risk policy covered a different interest in the property than the Accolas' homeowner's policy from Chubb Insurance Co. (Chubb).…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Stebane Nash Co. v. Campbellsport Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Tischendorf v. Lynn Mutual Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Dunlavy v. Dairyland Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Ben-Hur Manufacturing Co. v. Firemen's Insurance Co. of New JerseyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Society Insurance v. Capitol Indemnity Corp.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API