Legal Opinion

Stransky v. Kousek

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1929PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStevens, J.

1. The policy provided that no action should he maintained against the defendant insurance carrier except to recover “loss resulting from damages assessed by law against the assured.” The insurance company was made a party defendant and defended the action without pleading this provision of the policy in abatement. Approximately four months after the final judgment was entered in the action, the defendant company was permitted to amend .its answer so as to plead this provision in the policy. By failing to plead in abatement and by answering and defending on the merits, the defendant company…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Papke v. HaerleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Bro v. Standard Accident Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Drewek v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Hunt v. DollarWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Bachhuber v. BoosalisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Attoe v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Bernard v. Wisconsin Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933

4 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