Pella Farmers Mutual Insurance v. Hartland Richmond Town Insurance
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.
It is clear that the agreement for reinsurance did not create a liability for assessment unless such liability arises by statute under all such agreements. The question is whether ch. 202, Stats., imposes such liability. Is ch. 202 to be construed so as to require that when a town *32mutual which reinsures risks of another company under sec. 202.07 makes an assessment under sec. 202.11, it must levy its assessment against the reinsured company as well as against those whose property it directly insures? No part of ch. 202 deals specifically and expressly with the problem.
A town mutual is formed…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cass County v. Mercantile Town Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Groh v. W. O. Krahn, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- McCarthy v. SteinkellnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- Maurer v. International Re-Insurance Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1952
- Stradley v. Southwestern Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- State v. ClausenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. GouldWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- In Matter of Estate of WalkerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
- Boyle v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1993
- State v. OlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.