Ludwig v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBroadfoot, J.
Prior to the trial before Judge Neelen the defendant, upon three occasions, moved for leave to file an amended answer to set up as an additional defense an allegation that between the date of the application and the date of the delivery of the policy the insured had consulted two physicians in Milwaukee; that as a result of said consultations the insured knew on the date of the delivery of the policy that his health had changed for the worse and that he failed to disclose said information to the defendant. The motions were denied in each instance. The motions were grounded on the provisions…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Cordes v. HoffmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Platke v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Kelly v. Madison National Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
- Powalka v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1968
- Platke v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.