Legal Opinion

Binsfeld v. Home Mutual Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1945PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarlow, J.

The question presented is whether appellant is entitled to costs under ch. 271, Stats., on the granting of its motion for summary judgment dismissing respondent’s complaint without prejudice to timely recommence another action,

Respondent, Edward Binsfeld, seeks to recover damages in an action at law against appellant, Home Mutual Insurance Company. Appellant filed a plea in abatement, and then made a motion for summary judgment dismissing respondent’s complaint, for the reason that the proofs of loss submitted by respondent did not comply with the proofs required by the policy, as a condition…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Holzinger v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Binsfeld v. Home Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Potts v. Farmers Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Cottrill v. PinkertonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  5. French v. Continental Assurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Sehlin v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Sehlin v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API