Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kuchenmeister v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co., 310 N.W.2d 86.

40 citing documents.

Pecinovsky v. AMCO Insurance Co. 613 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Pecinovsky v. AMCO Insurance Co. 613 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Co., -89 (Minn.1981); Pinney v. State Farm Fire & Cas.
Meister v. Western National Mutual Insurance 479 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1992
Meister v. Western National Mutual Insurance 479 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1992
Co., Holman v. All Nation Ins.
INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA v. Santa Cruz 800 P.2d 585 Ariz. 1990
Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. 438 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. 438 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Pinney v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 435 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Westendorf v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co. 435 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Westendorf v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co. 435 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Pinney v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 435 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Likewise, an offer was found deficient under Hastings ’ third requirement because the offer merely informed the insured of the availability of additional coverage and urged the insured to contact the company if interested.
Jablonski v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 408 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1987
Jablonski v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 408 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1987
Hickman v. Group Health Plan, Inc. 396 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1986
Lewis v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co. 391 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1986
Lewis v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Co. 391 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1986
-89 (Minn.1981), where we held that when an insurer fails to make the mandatory offers of additional coverages under subdivision 6, “[the additional] coverage is implied in law as included in the insured’s policy at the time of the accident.” The confusion in this case centers around the proper meaning of this phra
Siebels v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 374 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Siebels v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 374 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
(right to a jury trial to determine whether the insured would have purchased the underinsured coverage would be too speculative and would allow insurers to circumvent the intent of the legislature).
Beukhof v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. 371 N.W.2d 538 Minn. 1985
Beukhof v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. 371 N.W.2d 538 Minn. 1985
Beukhof’s is inapplicable to the instant case.
Tibbals v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Tibbals v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Erickson ex rel. Erickson v. Allstate Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Erickson ex rel. Erickson v. Allstate Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Henriksen v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 364 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Henriksen v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 364 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The overall concern of the supreme court, expressed through articulation of the four requirements in Hastings , is that the insurer make a “meaningful offer,” Kuchenmeister, at 88 , of underinsured motorists coverage.
Squier v. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. 356 N.W.2d 832 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Squier v. Milwaukee Mut. Ins. Co. 356 N.W.2d 832 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Hauer v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co. 352 N.W.2d 406 Minn. 1984
Hauer v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co. 352 N.W.2d 406 Minn. 1984
Integrity does not challenge the trial court’s finding that the 1972
Maher v. All Nation Insurance Co. 340 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Maher v. All Nation Insurance Co. 340 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Frank v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 336 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 1983
Frank v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 336 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 1983
Randall v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 335 N.W.2d 247 Minn. 1983
Randall v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 335 N.W.2d 247 Minn. 1983
Although appellants need not have made an offer in the strict sense of contract law, we have strictly interpreted the statute to require a “meaningful offer.”
Hastings v. United Pacific Insurance Co. 318 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 1982
Hastings v. United Pacific Insurance Co. 318 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 1982
League General Insurance Co. v. Tvedt 317 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1982
League General Insurance Co. v. Tvedt 317 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1982
is our most recent decision involving mandatory offers.