1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Wis.2d
  4. 8 Wis.2d
  5. 8 Wis.2d 388 (1959)
 

REETZ v. WERCH

8 Wis.2d 388 (1959)

REETZ and another, Plaintiffs and Respondents, v. WERCH and others, Defendants: CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant and Respondent: VIRGINIA SURETY COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

November 3, 1959.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant there were briefs by Kivett & Kasdorf, attorneys, and Harold A. Dall of counsel, all of Milwaukee, and oral argument by Mr. Dall.

For the respondents Reetz there was a brief and oral argument by Harold V. Schoenecker of Milwaukee.

For the respondent Continental Casualty Company there were briefs by Lowry & Hunter, and oral argument by Willis J. Zick, all of Waukesha.

FAIRCHILD, J.

The issue results from the presence of the "excess" clauses in the two policies. The pertinent excess clause in the Continental policy is the proviso in the "other insurance" paragraph quoted in the statement of facts. In the Virginia policy, it is the "other insurance" paragraph of the "Long Haul Truckmen" indorsement. If neither policy contained its excess clause, it is undisputed that both policies would cover the liability which the plaintiff seeks...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases