Legal Opinion

Taluc v. Fall Creek Farmers Mutual Fire Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 13, 1931PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairchild, J.

The evidence before the court at the time of nonsuit showed that the agent of the insurance company filled out the application for insurance and without making any inquiry of plaintiff inserted the answers on which it now bases the defense against plaintiff’s claim. The agent had before him the deed under which plaintiff and his wife acquired title to the property insured. In order to permit the defendant to avoid its policy it must be given the advantage of the misstatement as to ownership of the farm, which is due to the mistake or fault of its own agent and not to fraud or bad faith on the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Barly v. Public Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Collum v. National Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Nolden v. Mutual Benefit Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Stockinger v. Central National InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Langlois v. Wisconsin National Life InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Emmco Insurance v. Palatine InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Zepczyk v. NelsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967

9 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