Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bobich v. Oja, 104 N.W.2d 19.

204 citing documents.

Henning Nelson Construction Co. v. Fireman's Fund American Life Insurance Co. 383 N.W.2d 645 Minn. 1986
Id.; Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287, 294
Estes v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 358 N.W.2d 123 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Estes v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 358 N.W.2d 123 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287
Burgraff v. Aetna Life & Casualty Co. 346 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 1984
Waseca Mutual Insurance Co. v. Noska 331 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 1983
Waseca Mutual Insurance Co. v. Noska 331 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 1983
Paul School District No. 625 v. Columbia Transit Corp., Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287
American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Ryan 330 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 1983
American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Ryan 330 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 1983
See Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287, 294
St. Paul School District No. 625 v. Columbia Transit Corp. 321 N.W.2d 41 Minn. 1982
St. Paul School District No. 625 v. Columbia Transit Corp. 321 N.W.2d 41 Minn. 1982
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287
LaPlante v. Pyramid Life Ins. Co. 267 N.W.2d 728 Minn. 1978
LaPlante v. Pyramid Life Ins. Co. 267 N.W.2d 728 Minn. 1978
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287
Canadian Universal Insurance Co. v. Fire Watch, Inc. 258 N.W.2d 570 Minn. 1977
Canadian Universal Insurance Co. v. Fire Watch, Inc. 258 N.W.2d 570 Minn. 1977
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287
Farmers & Merchants State Bank v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance 242 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1976
Farmers & Merchants State Bank v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance 242 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1976
Co. 264 Minn. 378 , Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , Weis v. State Farm Mutual Auto.
Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. Bartlett 240 N.W.2d 310 Minn. 1976
Bituminous Casualty Corp. v. Bartlett 240 N.W.2d 310 Minn. 1976
Co. 264 Minn. 378 , Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , Weis v. State Farm Mutual Auto.
Dairyland Insurance v. Implement Dealers Insurance 199 N.W.2d 806 Minn. 1972
Dairyland Insurance v. Implement Dealers Insurance 199 N.W.2d 806 Minn. 1972
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , Simon v. Milwaukee Auto.
Ostendorf v. Arrow Insurance Company 182 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1970
Ostendorf v. Arrow Insurance Company 182 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1970
Co. 262 Minn. 378, 385 , 115 N. W. (2d) 40, 45 ; Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 .
Orren v. Phoenix Insurance Company 179 N.W.2d 166 Minn. 1970
Orren v. Phoenix Insurance Company 179 N.W.2d 166 Minn. 1970
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 .
Farkas v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. 173 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1969
Farkas v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. 173 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1969
Co. of America, 268 Minn. 36 , 127 N. W. (2d) 541 ; Lowry v. Kneeland, 263 Minn. 537 , 117 N. W. (2d) 207 ; Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; also, see, Annotation, 26 A. L. R. (3d) 883.
FARM BUREAU MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY v. Stein 170 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 1969
FARM BUREAU MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY v. Stein 170 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 1969
It is well settled in Minnesota that— “[cjontracts of insurance, like other contracts, must be construed according to the terms the parties have used, to be taken and understood, in the absence of ambiguity, in their plain, ordinary, and popular sense, so as to give effect to the intention of the parties as it appears from the entire contract.” Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287, 294 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19, 24 .
Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co. of Wisconsin v. Eagles Lodge of Hallock 165 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
Employers Mutual Liability Insurance Co. of Wisconsin v. Eagles Lodge of Hallock 165 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 .
Stein v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co. 161 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 1968
MacRUNNEL v. NORTHLAND INSURANCE COMPANY 153 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1967
MacRUNNEL v. NORTHLAND INSURANCE COMPANY 153 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1967
3 Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; Simon v. Milwaukee Auto.
Rasmussen v. Prudential Insurance Company 152 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1967
Rasmussen v. Prudential Insurance Company 152 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1967
an applicant for insurance and an insurance company is essentially and fundamentally the same as between parties negotiating other contracts, and, as such, is purely contractual, Hockemeyer v. Pooler, 268 Minn. 551 , 130 N. W. (2d) 367 ; 2 that, subject to the statutory law of the state, a policy of insurance is within the application of general principles of the law of contracts, Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; and that an application for life insurance is only a proposal and
Iowa National Mutual Insurance v. Universal Underwriters Insurance 150 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 1967
Iowa National Mutual Insurance v. Universal Underwriters Insurance 150 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 1967
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; Weis v. State Farm Mutual Auto.
Greenlee v. Drees 144 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1966
Greenlee v. Drees 144 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1966
Co. 246 Minn. 62 , 74 N. W. (2d) 116 ; Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; Shake v. Westchester Fire Ins.
Swedeen v. Swedeen 134 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 1965
Swedeen v. Swedeen 134 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 1965
Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; Heikes v. New York Life Ins.
Bituminous Casualty Corporation v. Swartout 133 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 1965
Bituminous Casualty Corporation v. Swartout 133 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 1965
2 Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 .
Hammer v. Malkerson Motors, Inc. 132 N.W.2d 174 Minn. 1964
Followed Hammer v. Malkerson Motors, Inc. 132 N.W.2d 174 Minn. 1964
Many of the rules that we follow in interpreting insurance contracts are to be found in Tomlyanovich v. Tomlyanovich, 239 Minn. 250 , 58 N. W. (2d) 855 , 50 A. L. R. (2d) 108; Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; and many other decisions of this court.
Gabrelcik v. National Indemnity Co. 131 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1964
Gabrelcik v. National Indemnity Co. 131 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1964
See, Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19 ; Simon v. Milwaukee Auto Mutual Ins.
Lang v. General Insurance Co. of America 127 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1964
Lang v. General Insurance Co. of America 127 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1964
The Minnesota law with respect to the obligation to defend and with respect to the construction of insurance policies has been clearly set forth by this court in the recent case of Bobich v. Oja, 258 Minn. 287, 293 , 104 N. W. (2d) 19, 24 , as follows: *40 “1.
Crum v. Anchor Casualty Co. 119 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1963