Legal Opinion

Redeman v. Preferred Accident Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided May 1, 1934PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNelson, J.

There is no dispute as to the material facts. On March 3, 1920, the defendant, hereafter called the company, issued to the plaintiff a health insurance policy wherein and whereby it insured the plaintiff for a period of three months against disability from sickness, subject to the provisions and limitations of the policy. The policy provided :

“No agent has authority to change this policy or to waive any of its provisions. No change in this policy shall be valid unless approved by an executive officer of the company and such approval be indorsed thereon. . . .
“Section G. This policy may be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Insurance Co. v. EgglestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Brink v. . Hanover Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
  3. Georgia Home Insurance v. AllenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
  4. Wolf v. District Grand Lodge No. 6, I. O. B. B.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Knoebel v. North American Accident InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1908

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Guberman v. William Penn Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  2. Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1948
  3. Silverton Enterprises, Inc. v. General Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1988
  4. World Insurance Co. v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1956
  5. Stueck v. Le DucWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973

8 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