From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kisting v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Oct 2, 1969
416 F.2d 967 (7th Cir. 1969)

Summary

affirming summary judgment for defendant on insurance coverage claim where plaintiff failed to comply with policy provisions by refusing to answer questions under oath on the basis of the Fifth Amendment

Summary of this case from Bank of America v. First Mutual Bancorp of Illinois

Opinion

No. 17317.

October 2, 1969.

William Elden, Chicago, Ill., for appellants.

Daniel J. Leahy, Samuel Levin, Chicago, Ill., for appellee.

Before SWYGERT and CUMMINGS, Circuit Judges, and CAMPBELL, District Judge.


Joseph F. Kisting and Anchor Sales and Service, Incorporated, plaintiffs-appellants were named insureds on a policy of insurance issued by the defendant-appellee, Westchester Fire Insurance Company, and insuring certain farm property located in the State of Wisconsin. On May 30, 1966 the buildings were damaged by fire.

Pursuant to the provisions of the policy the insurer served notice on plaintiff Kisting that it desired to take his examination under oath. The notice was dated August 30, 1966 and was signed by an attorney for the insurer, Daniel J. Leahy as "Representative for said Insurance Company". The examination was scheduled for September 7, 1966. Plaintiff Kisting attended the examination but refused to answer a number of relevant questions.

Defendant subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment based on the refusal to answer these questions. Upon full consideration of all of the issues presented, the District Court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' action, with prejudice.

We have reviewed the entire record and, upon full consideration of the arguments advanced and authorities cited by the parties, we find that the notice of examination was in all respects proper and that under the law of Wisconsin or Illinois, plaintiff Kisting's refusal to answer the many questions asked him at the examination was a breach of the policy provisions and a bar to recovery. There being no genuine issue of fact in dispute the award of summary judgment was proper. Ashwell Company, Inc. v. Transamerica Insurance Company, 407 F.2d 762 (7 Cir. 1969). All questions of law were thoroughly discussed and correctly resolved in the excellent memorandum of the District Judge ruling on the motion for summary judgment. Kisting v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company, 290 F. Supp. 141 (W.D.Wis. 1968). That memorandum is hereby adopted and incorporated herein.

Accordingly, we affirm.


Summaries of

Kisting v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Oct 2, 1969
416 F.2d 967 (7th Cir. 1969)

affirming summary judgment for defendant on insurance coverage claim where plaintiff failed to comply with policy provisions by refusing to answer questions under oath on the basis of the Fifth Amendment

Summary of this case from Bank of America v. First Mutual Bancorp of Illinois

applying Wisconsin law

Summary of this case from Hartford Acc. Ind. Co. v. Pro-Football
Case details for

Kisting v. Westchester Fire Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:Joseph F. KISTING and Anchor Sales Co. Plaintiffs-Appellants, v…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

Date published: Oct 2, 1969

Citations

416 F.2d 967 (7th Cir. 1969)

Citing Cases

In-Towne Restaurant v. Aetna Casualty Surety

See Kisting v. Westchester Fire Ins. Co., 290 F. Supp. 141, 149 (W.D. Wis. 1968), aff'd. 416 F.2d 967 (7th…

Dyno-Bite, Inc. v. Travelers Co.

nation [is] material, in the sense that a true answer to it [is] of the substance of the obligation of the…