Legal Opinion

Goetz v. Hartford Fire Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 11, 1927PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEschweiRER, J.

The liability of the defendants is dependent upon the riders, parts of their respective insurance policies, each such rider being therein described as “Use and Occupancy Form,” and as insurance “on the use and occupancy of . . . buildings, machinery, and equipment situated on” certain described real property.

The clause upon which, if at all, the liability must be predicated reads as follows:

“The conditions of this contract are that if the buildings described above, and machinery and equipment contained therein, be destroyed or damaged by fire occurring during the term of this policy so as to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Michael v. Prussian National InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. Wilson & Toomer Fertilizer Co. v. Automobile Ins.District Court, S.D. Florida · 1922

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. New England Gas & Electric Ass'n v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1953
  2. NATIONAL UN. FIRE INS. CO. v. Anderson-Prichard Oil Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1944
  3. Hawkinson Tread Tire Service Co. v. Indiana Lumbermens Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1951
  4. Puget Sound Lumber Co. v. Mechanics' & Traders' InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Manduca Datsun, Inc. v. Universal Underwriters InsuranceIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984

6 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