Legal Opinion

Van Erden v. Sobczak

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided February 25, 2003No. 02-1595PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCurley, J.

¶ 1. Steven and Cherie Van Erden appeal from the trial court's order granting summary judgment and dismissing their declaratory judgment *885action against the City of Milwaukee, in which the Van Erdens sought a declaration that the City had a duty to offer underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage to Steven Van Erden, as a City employee, in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 632.32(4m)(a)l (1999-2000).1 The Van Erdens also appeal from the trial court's order granting summary judgment dismissing their declaratory judgment action against American Family Mutual Insurance Company, their automobile insurance…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Green Spring Farms v. KerstenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. MartinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Dowhower v. West Bend Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Badger Mutual Insurance v. SchmitzWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Taylor v. Greatway InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Commercial Union Midwest Insurance v. VorbeckCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003
  2. Van Erden v. SobczakCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  3. WPS & Community Health Plan of Wisconsin v. Church Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003
  4. Klinger v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2005
  5. Commercial Union Midwest Insurance v. VorbeckCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2003

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

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

Powered by the Exa API