Legal Opinion

Ruenger v. Soodsma

Court of Appeals of Wisconsin

Decided March 31, 2005No. 04-1795PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVergeront, J.

¶ 1. Jeanna Ruenger appeals the circuit court order determining that the reducing clause in the underinsured motorist (UIM) endorsement of her personal auto policy was valid and also determining that there was no UIM coverage under her business auto policy for the injuries she sustained while operating her skid loader. With respect to the personal auto policy, we agree with the circuit court that the reducing clause is valid because it complies with Wis. Stat. § 632.32(5)(i) 1 and is not ambiguous when read in the context of the entire policy. With respect to the business auto policy, we…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. In RE MARRIAGE OF COOK v. CookWisconsin Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Wirth v. EhlyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Folkman v. QuammeWisconsin Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Badger Mutual Insurance v. SchmitzWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Mau v. North Dakota Insurance Reserve FundWisconsin Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Maryland Arms Ltd. Partnership v. ConnellWisconsin Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Marotz v. HallmanWisconsin Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Lisowski v. Hastings Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Flejter v. West Bend Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2010
  5. ACUITY v. Estate of Michael ShimetaWisconsin 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