Legal Opinion

Fink v. La Crosse Mutual Fire Insurance

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 13, 1931PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWickhem, J.

The policies in question contained the following provision, which is required under the standard fire insurance policy law of Wisconsin:

‘‘Thi-s entire policy shall be void if the insured has concealed, or misrepresented any material fact or circumstance concerning this -insurance or the subject thereof, or in case of.any fraud orHfalse swearing by the insured touching any mafter relating- to this insurance or the subject thereof, whether before or after a loss.”

This court has held in F. Dohmen Co. v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co. 96 Wis. 38, 71 N. W. 69:

“Any .trick, artifice, or deception practiced…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Beyer v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  2. F. Dohmen Co. v. Niagara Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Dogge v. Northwestern National InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Bannon v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1902
  5. Wiesman v. American Insurance Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Gechijian v. Richmond InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  2. Liberty Tea Co. v. La Salle Fire InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Kline v. Washington National InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Bobczyk v. Integrity Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API