Legal Opinion

Danbeck v. American Family Mutual Insurance

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided December 23, 1999No. 99-1142PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVergeront, J.

¶ 1. This appeal concerns the interpretation of a provision in an underinsured motorist (UIM) policy that coverage would be provided "only after the limits of liability under bodily injury liability bonds or policies have been exhausted by payment of judgment or settlements." American Family Mutual Insurance Company sought summary judgment in the trial court on the ground that Dan Danbeck, its insured, had not satisfied this clause and therefore was not entitled to benefits under his UIM policy. The trial court denied the motion, concluding the clause was reasonably susceptible to more than…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. In RE MARRIAGE OF COOK v. CookWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Loy v. BundersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Pierringer v. HogerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Schmidt v. ClothierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  5. Buzzard v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1991

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Danbeck v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GilletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Curran v. Progressive Northwestern Insurance Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Malik v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
  5. Secura Supreme Insurance Company v. The Estate of Daniel Keith HuckWisconsin Supreme Court · 2023

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