Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Holm v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co., 261 N.W.2d 598.

83 citing documents.

In RE the Arbritration of: Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Co., 603-04 (Minn. 1977) (affirming the denial of benefits to Holm who was injured during an arrest because the arresting officer’s police car was only “a means of transportation to the scene of the arrest and battery”); Wieneke v. Home Mut.
Dougherty v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co. 699 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 2005
Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Great West Casualty 695 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Great West Casualty 695 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Loesl 977 P.2d 140 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1999
Medicine Lake Bus Co. v. Smith 554 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Medicine Lake Bus Co. v. Smith 554 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Ins., (quoting National Mut.
Allied Mut. v. Western Nat. Mut. 552 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1996
Allied Mut. v. Western Nat. Mut. 552 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1996
Co., -03 (Minn.1977); and National Family Ins.
Benike v. Dairyland Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 465 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Benike v. Dairyland Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 465 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Anderson v. American Casualty Co. 504 N.W.2d 467 Minn. 1993
Anderson v. American Casualty Co. 504 N.W.2d 467 Minn. 1993
Anderson v. American Casualty Co. of Reading, Pennsylvania 497 N.W.2d 302 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Anderson v. American Casualty Co. of Reading, Pennsylvania 497 N.W.2d 302 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Dohman v. Housely 478 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Dohman v. Housely 478 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
National Indemnity Co. of Minnesota v. Ness 457 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
National Indemnity Co. of Minnesota v. Ness 457 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Lindsey v. Sturm 436 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Lindsey v. Sturm 436 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Strand v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 429 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Strand v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 429 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Anderson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. 427 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Anderson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. 427 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
See, e.g., Holm v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co., *752 (act of independent significance where police officer left his vehicle to make an arrest and commit battery on the motorcyclist he was chasing); (act of independent significance where assailant and plaintiff drove alongsi
West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Armstrong 419 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Armstrong 419 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Farmers Insurance Group v. Chapman 416 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Farmers Insurance Group v. Chapman 416 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Continental Western Insurance Co. v. Klug 415 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1987
Continental Western Insurance Co. v. Klug 415 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1987
Co., we stated that the vehicle must be an “active accessory” in causing the injury.
Ed Kraemer & Sons, Inc. v. Transit Casualty Co. 402 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Ed Kraemer & Sons, Inc. v. Transit Casualty Co. 402 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-04 (Minn.1977) (tortious battery by police officer does not “arise out of the use” of an automobile when the battery is inflicted outside the vehicle and the vehicle is merely used to transport the tortfeasor to the scene of the battery).
Edwards v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 399 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Edwards v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 399 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wieneke v. Home Mutual Insurance Co. 397 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Continental Western Insurance Co. v. Klug 394 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Continental Western Insurance Co. v. Klug 394 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wieneke v. Home Mutual Insurance Co. 397 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marklund v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 391 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marklund v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 391 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(emphasis in the original).
Brehm v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 390 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Brehm v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 390 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(citation omitted) (emphasis in original).
Barry v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 386 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Barry v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 386 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. 384 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1986
West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. 384 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1986
The phrase has been interpreted to require “some causal connection between the injury and the use of the vehicle for transportation purposes,” or that the vehicle be an “active accessory” to the injury
Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Smith 376 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Smith 376 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Hedlund v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. 373 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1985