Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 152 N.W.2d 476.

28 citing documents.

Marriage of Gully v. Gully 599 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1999
Marriage of Gully v. Gully 599 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1999
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 349 , (stating that in the context of rescission of an insurance contract a misrepresentation is material when a party “reliefs] on [the misrepresentation] or sufferfs] detriment thereby”).
Independent School District No. 197 v. Accident & Casualty Insurance of Winterthur 525 N.W.2d 600 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Independent School District No. 197 v. Accident & Casualty Insurance of Winterthur 525 N.W.2d 600 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344, (insurer may avoid coverage if a material misrepresentation increases the risk of loss, regardless of the insured’s intent).
Crown Coco, Inc. v. Red Fox Restaurant of Royalton, Inc. 409 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Crown Coco, Inc. v. Red Fox Restaurant of Royalton, Inc. 409 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
To prevail, appellants must show that the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law are “manifestly contrary to the evidence” and “clearly erroneous.” Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344 , Minn.R.Civ.P.
Brunsoman v. Lexington-Silverwood 385 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Brunsoman v. Lexington-Silverwood 385 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342
Proprietors Insurance Co. v. Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis 374 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Proprietors Insurance Co. v. Northwestern National Bank of Minneapolis 374 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
6, 1985) (citing Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 347
Graham Investment Co. v. Grouse 369 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Graham Investment Co. v. Grouse 369 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Preferred Bisk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344
Melby v. Commissioner of Public Safety 367 N.W.2d 527 Minn. 1985
Melby v. Commissioner of Public Safety 367 N.W.2d 527 Minn. 1985
See also Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342 , Northern States Power v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Gand v. Jay Bros., Inc. 367 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Gand v. Jay Bros., Inc. 367 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344 , Minn.R.Civ.P.
Liedtke v. Cloquet Service Center, Inc. 367 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Liedtke v. Cloquet Service Center, Inc. 367 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344
Dufrane v. Commissioner of Public Safety 353 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Transamerican Insurance Co. v. Austin Farm Center, Inc. 354 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Transamerican Insurance Co. v. Austin Farm Center, Inc. 354 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342
Dufrane v. Commissioner of Public Safety 353 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342 , ).
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
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344 , Nielsen v. Mutual Service Cas.
State Ex Rel. Caffrey v. Metropolitan Airports Commission 246 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1976
State Ex Rel. Caffrey v. Metropolitan Airports Commission 246 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1976
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342, 344 , : “It is well established that a trial court’s findings of fact will not be disturbed on appeal, even though we might not agree with them, unless they are clearly erroneous in the sense that they are manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the
Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc. 229 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1975
Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc. 229 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1975
Co. v. Anderson, 277 Minn. 342