Legal Opinion

Hicks v. New York Fire Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided March 2, 1954PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGehl, J.

Defendants’ only contention is that the evidence does not sustain the jury’s finding. The residence was equipped with an oil-burning hot-water heating system. At the time in question plaintiffs were in Florida. They had provided a friend, Flerbert Lange, with a key to the house. When he entered the house on February 26, 1950, he found that a radiator on the third floor was leaking and that the water had soaked the entire first and second floors. Plumbers were called and found a broken radiator on the third floor. They turned off the water in the basement, shut off the burner, disconnected the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McGaw v. WassmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Vogelsburg v. Mason & Hanger Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Walraven v. Sprague, Warner & Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1940

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Vonasek v. Hirsch and Stevens, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1974
  2. Hart-Bartlett-Sturtevant Grain Co. v. Aetna InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  3. Peil v. KohnkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. United Military Supply, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. United Military Supply, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API