Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Blair v. Espeland, 43 N.W.2d 274.

26 citing documents.

Ram Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 820 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
Ram Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 820 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
See Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444, 446 , see also Buell v. United Firemen’s Ins.
Jerry Mathison Construction, Inc. v. Binsfield 615 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Jerry Mathison Construction, Inc. v. Binsfield 615 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444, 448 , see also Jostens, Inc. v. Mission Ins.
Economy Fire & Casualty Co. v. Iverson 426 N.W.2d 195 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Economy Fire & Casualty Co. v. Iverson 426 N.W.2d 195 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
and Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444
Jostens, Inc. v. Mission Insurance Co. 387 N.W.2d 161 Minn. 1986
Jostens, Inc. v. Mission Insurance Co. 387 N.W.2d 161 Minn. 1986
Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , controls.
Riewe v. Arnesen 381 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Riewe v. Arnesen 381 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
The trial court properly relied on Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , to resolve this issue.
Independent School District No. 14 v. AMPRO Corp. 361 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Independent School District No. 14 v. AMPRO Corp. 361 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444, 447 , Norby v. Bankers Life Co., 304 Minn. 464, 467
Lines v. Ryan 272 N.W.2d 896 Minn. 1978
Lines v. Ryan 272 N.W.2d 896 Minn. 1978
In Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , we held that the insurer is the real party-in-interest where it fully reimburses the insured for his loss.
Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Thompson-Yaeger, Inc. 260 N.W.2d 548 Minn. 1977
Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Thompson-Yaeger, Inc. 260 N.W.2d 548 Minn. 1977
See, Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444
Reserve Insurance v. Village of Big Lake 230 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1975
Reserve Insurance v. Village of Big Lake 230 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1975
The purpose of the March 20,1972, “Loan Beceipt and Trust Agreement” was to make a valid loan as authorized by Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444
National Union Fire Insurance Company v. Grimes 153 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 1967
National Union Fire Insurance Company v. Grimes 153 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 1967
Co. 212 Minn. 500 , 4 N. W. (2d) 316 , 140 A. L. R. 1236; Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , 43 N. W. (2d) 274 ; Flor v. Buck, 189 Minn. 131 , .
Coble v. Lacey 101 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1960
Coble v. Lacey 101 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1960
In so far as the issue involves the question of who must bring the action for contribution when a defense is interposed thereto, the question has already been decided in Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444, 446 , 43 N. W. (2d) 274, 276 , where we said: “If the loss of an insured is fully covered by insurance and the insurer has compensated insured for the loss, the insurer is subrogated to any rights insured may have had against a third party because of the loss.
Rinkel v. Lee's Plumbing & Heating Co. 99 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 1959
Rinkel v. Lee's Plumbing & Heating Co. 99 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 1959
In view of the loan agreement that existed between plaintiff and his insurer we believe that Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , 43 N. W. (2d) 274 , is controlling and that under the circumstances plaintiff is a proper party.
Anderson v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Co. 231 Minn. 469 Minn. 1950
Anderson v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Co. 231 Minn. 469 Minn. 1950
McGuigan v. Allen, 165 Minn. 390 , ; Blair v. Espeland, 231 Minn. 444 , 43 N. W. (2d) 274 .