Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Owens v. Federated Mutual Implement & Hardware Insurance Co., 328 N.W.2d 162.
- R.S. v. State 459 N.W.2d 680 Minn. 1990
-
RS v. State
459 N.W.2d 680
Minn. 1990
Implement & Hardware Ins.
-
R.S. v. State
459 N.W.2d 680
Minn. 1990
Implement & Hardware Ins.
- Investors Sav. Bank, F.S.B. v. Miller 440 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- Investors Sav. Bank, F.S.B. v. Miller 440 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. 388 N.W.2d 732 Minn. 1986
-
Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.
388 N.W.2d 732
Minn. 1986
We believe the section must be “construed as a whole to harmonize all its parts,” Owens v. Federated Mutual Implement & Hardware Insurance Co., and we hold, therefore, that subdivision 6(f) is to be read as requiring offers of optional coverage to be made when a policy is issued or renewed after the effective date of the subdivision.- 2 In this case, Kemper’s policy was not renewed after the effective date of the subdivision (May 27) and bef
- Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. 368 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
-
Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.
368 N.W.2d 753
Minn. Ct. App. 1985
where the court refused to apply a recently enacted statute to a policy which was in existence before the effective date of the statute.
- Willmus for Benefit of Willmus v. COM'N OF REV. 371 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 1985
- Willmus for Benefit of Willmus v. COM'N OF REV. 371 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 1985
- Kelsey v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- Kelsey v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- Burgie v. League General Insurance Co. 355 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-
Burgie v. League General Insurance Co.
355 N.W.2d 466
Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Implement and Hardware Insurance Co., (a statute should ordinarily be construed as a whole to harmonize its parts).
- Green-Glo Turf Farms, Inc. v. State 347 N.W.2d 491 Minn. 1984