Legal Opinion

Gambrell v. Campbellsport Mutual Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1970No. 250PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.

Summary judgment may be granted only when there is no factual dispute which requires reso lution by court or jury. The initial contention of the appellant is that a factual dispute exists. The company claims that there is an issue of fact to be tried as to the amount of loss, because nowhere in the record does there appear any information in respect to the equalized value of the property destroyed or the percentage to which the property was destroyed beyond the “bald" assertion of the building inspector’s report that the damage exceeded 50 percent. We deem this a belated and untimely attack…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Reilly v. Franklin Insurance Co. of St. LouisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Congress Bar & Restaurant, Inc. v. Transamerica InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Fox v. Milwaukee Mechanics' InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Eck v. Netherlands InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Seider v. O'CONNELLWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Stahlberg v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1978
  3. Gimbels Midwest, Inc. v. Northwestern National InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Mohr v. City of MilwaukeeCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1981
  5. Breiby v. Department of AdministrationWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972

8 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