Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite SCSC Corp. v. Allied Mutual Insurance Co., 536 N.W.2d 305.

87 citing documents.

Kelly Bell, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Co., -14 (Minn. 1995) (“If the policy contains an exclusion clause, the burden then shifts to the insurer to prove the applicability of the exclusion as an affirmative defense.
Ridgewood Bay Resort, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Co., d 910 (Minn. 2009).
A18-0742 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Nicholas Johnson and Michelle Johnson, individually and as parents and natural guardians of D.J., a minor, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Co., d 305, 316 (Minn. 1995).
Depositors Ins. Co. v. Dollansky 919 N.W.2d 684 Minn. 2018
Madina Ula v. Bertil Eugene Gunnarson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Madina Ula v. Bertil Eugene Gunnarson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Midwest Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wolters 831 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2013
Midwest Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wolters 831 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2013
Co., rev’d on other grounds
Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L.H. Bolduc Co. 825 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2013
Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L.H. Bolduc Co. 825 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2013
Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co. 819 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2012
Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co. 819 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2012
Co., see also 22 Britton D. Weimer, Clarance E. Hagglund & Andrew F. Whitman, Minnesota Practice-Insurance Law & Practice § 3:2 (2d ed.2010) (stating that determination of coverage requires analysis of “cla
American Bank of St. Paul v. Coating Specialties, Inc. 787 N.W.2d 202 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
American Bank of St. Paul v. Coating Specialties, Inc. 787 N.W.2d 202 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Bahr v. Boise Cascade Corp. 766 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2009
Bahr v. Boise Cascade Corp. 766 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2009
Co., we examined whether the district court properly denied summary judgment even though the case was on appeal after a jury verdict.
Hornberger v. Wendel 764 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Hornberger v. Wendel 764 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Co., as well as recover attorney fees incurred in a declaratory-judgment action against the insurer, Morrison v. Swenson, 274 Minn. 127, 137-38
Donnelly Bros. Construction Co. v. State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 759 N.W.2d 651 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Donnelly Bros. Construction Co. v. State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 759 N.W.2d 651 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Co., (holding that allocation is improper where the jury found the occurrence was a single 1977 chemical spill); Northern States Power Co., 523 *d at 664 (finding that actual injury was “continuous from the point of the first damage to the point of discovery or cleanup”); Indus.
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. A.P.I., Inc. 738 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. A.P.I., Inc. 738 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Co., (stating when duty to defend arises).
Wooddale Builders, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co. 722 N.W.2d 283 Minn. 2006
Wooddale Builders, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co. 722 N.W.2d 283 Minn. 2006
Co., (holding that when environmental damage resulted from a single chemical spill in 1977, only those policies on the risk in 1977 were responsible for the cost of remediation of ensuing continual leach of chemicals into groundwater until detection in 1988).
Soo Line Railroad v. Brown's Crew Car of Wyoming 694 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Westfield Insurance Co. v. Kroiss 694 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Soo Line Railroad v. Brown's Crew Car of Wyoming 694 N.W.2d 109 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Westfield Insurance Co. v. Kroiss 694 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Vaubel Farms, Inc. v. Shelby Farmers Mutual 679 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Vaubel Farms, Inc. v. Shelby Farmers Mutual 679 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation 667 N.W.2d 405 Minn. 2003
In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation 667 N.W.2d 405 Minn. 2003
Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc. 671 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc. 671 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Co., (noting that ambiguities regarding an insurance company’s duty to defend are resolved in favor of the insured).
Norwest Bank Minnesota North, N.A. v. Beckler 663 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Norwest Bank Minnesota North, N.A. v. Beckler 663 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Home Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh 658 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 2003
Home Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh 658 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 2003
Smith v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 656 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Smith v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 656 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation 652 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
In Re Silicone Implant Insurance Coverage Litigation 652 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Thommes v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 641 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 2002
Thommes v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 641 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 2002
Cargill, Inc. v. Evanston Insurance Co. 642 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Cargill, Inc. v. Evanston Insurance Co. 642 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Co., the supreme court found that a “Request for Information” from the insured can be considered a “suit” triggering the insurer’s duty to defend.
Home Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh 643 N.W.2d 307 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Home Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh 643 N.W.2d 307 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Co., the supreme court stated: Generally, * * * the formal tender of a defense request is a condition precedent to the recovery of attorney fees that a party incurs defending claims that a third party is contractually obligated to pay.
Andrew L. Youngquist, Inc. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co. 625 N.W.2d 178 Minn. Ct. App. 2001