Lucas v. Mueller
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: Oscar M. Fritz, Circuit Judge: We shall state only such facts as are necessary to present the question decided. The plaintiff was struck and injured by the defendant Mueller’s automobile while the' same was being operated by one Lillian Sangstead, Mueller at the time being in the car and in the front seat thereof.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the circuit court for Milwaukee county: Oscar M. Fritz, Circuit Judge: We shall state only such facts as are necessary to present the question decided. The plaintiff was struck and injured by the defendant Mueller’s automobile while the' same was being operated by one Lillian Sangstead, Mueller at the time being in the car and in the front seat thereof. Suit was begun against Mueller and .Miss Sangstead, which resulted in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $1,200. Mueller was insured in the defendant Interstate Exchange, and a garnishment suit was begun on the…
1Opinion of the CourtRosenberry, J.
A number of questions are raised, but we find it necessary to consider only one, and that is as to whether or not the terms of the policy insured the defendant Mueller against liability arising under the admitted circumstances of this case.
On the third page of the policy is a schedule of statements, in which the following is found: “The car will be used for ‘Pleasure only, owner driving,’ ” — the words “Pleasure only, owner driving” being inserted with a pen in a blank prepared for that purpose. The rider, under and by virtue of which the defendant Exchange is liable if at all, is as follows:
“…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Mauel v. Wisconsin Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1933
- Denley v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1935
- Ederer v. Milwaukee Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1936