Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Ptacek v. Minnesota Fire and Casualty

Date: 04-09-2002

Case Number: 01-2864

Judge: Per Curiam

Court: Wisconsin Court of Appeals for District III

Plaintiff's Attorney: Unknown

Defendant's Attorney: Unknown

Description:
2. On October 13, 1995, Ptacek was driving a vehicle owned by Larry and Joan Schaack and insured by Minnesota Fire. She was allegedly injured when a vehicle driven by Troy Kemmerer collided with her vehicle at an intersection near Prescott, Wisconsin. Apparently, Kemmerer failed to stop at the intersection because the stop sign was missing. Ptacek subsequently settled with Kemmerer's insurance company, PFL Life Insurance Company.


3. On September 28, 1998, Ptacek filed a complaint against Jeremy Fleming, Charles Hill, Matthew Marek, and Matthew Wolf. Ptacek alleged that on the night before the accident, Fleming removed the stop sign from the intersection and left it lying in a ditch. According to Ptacek, Hill, Marek and Wolf were with Fleming and saw Fleming remove the sign. Ptacek also brought an underinsured motorist claim against Minnesota Fire because it refused to pay the limits of the underinsured benefits provided in its policy.


4. After filing the complaint, Ptacek conducted no written or deposition discovery, nor did she file any motions with the circuit court. The defendants conducted some written discovery and took Ptacek's deposition on July 13, 1999. The defendants also sought summary judgment, arguing that Ptacek had signed a general release relieving all torfeasors from liability. The circuit court denied the motion.


5. Ptacek did write a letter to opposing counsel in 1999 and again in 2001, proposing mediation. However, Ptacek never sought an order compelling mediation. Wolf and Marek each responded to Ptacek's first letter by asking for a settlement demand. Ptacek did not reply to either request.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the
full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:
¶21. Here, the record reveals that Ptacek never indicated to the circuit court that her due process rights had been violated. Therefore we conclude that Ptacek raises the issue for the first time on appeal. As a result, we do not address her argument.


By the Court. Order affirmed.

Plaintiff's Experts:
Unavailable
Defendant's Experts:
Unavailable
Comments:
C.L.

About This Case

What was the outcome of Ptacek v. Minnesota Fire and Casualty?

The outcome was: ¶21. Here, the record reveals that Ptacek never indicated to the circuit court that her due process rights had been violated. Therefore we conclude that Ptacek raises the issue for the first time on appeal. As a result, we do not address her argument. By the Court. Order affirmed.

Which court heard Ptacek v. Minnesota Fire and Casualty?

This case was heard in Wisconsin Court of Appeals for District III, WI. The presiding judge was Per Curiam.

Who were the attorneys in Ptacek v. Minnesota Fire and Casualty?

Plaintiff's attorney: Unknown. Defendant's attorney: Unknown.

When was Ptacek v. Minnesota Fire and Casualty decided?

This case was decided on April 9, 2002.