Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite United Fire & Casualty Co. v. Bruggeman, 505 N.W.2d 87.

26 citing documents.

Melrose Gates, LLC v. Chor Moua 875 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2016
Melrose Gates, LLC v. Chor Moua 875 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2016
In doing so, we rejected the approach taken by the.court of appeals .in United Fire & -90 (Minn.App.1993), rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
Melrose Gates, LLC v. Chor Moua Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Melrose Gates, LLC v. Chor Moua Minn. Ct. App. 2015
United Fire & -90 (Minn. App. 1993), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Ram Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 820 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
Ram Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 820 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
The district court granted Rohde’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing RAM’s subrogation claim as a matter of law, relying on the court of appeals decision in United Fire & rev. denied (Minn. Oct.
RAM Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 805 N.W.2d 554 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
RAM Mutual Insurance Co. v. Rohde 805 N.W.2d 554 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
review denied (Minn. Oct.
TIG Insurance Co. v. Anderson 663 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
TIG Insurance Co. v. Anderson 663 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
As a co-insured, and an innocent insured, W. Anderson argues that a subrogation claim against him must be barred.- W. Anderson *5 claims that he should be granted “co-insured” status pursuant to this court’s decision in United Fire & .
State Auto Insurance Co. v. Knuttila 645 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State Auto Insurance Co. v. Knuttila 645 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Nuessmeier Electric, Inc. v. Weiss Manufacturing Co. 632 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Nuessmeier Electric, Inc. v. Weiss Manufacturing Co. 632 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Bigos v. Kluender 611 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Bigos v. Kluender 611 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
(holding landlord’s insurer may not subrogate against landlord’s tenant who negligently causes fire where no express agreement between landlord and tenant covering provision of fire insurance), review denied (Minn. Oct.
St. Paul Companies v. Van Beek 609 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
St. Paul Companies v. Van Beek 609 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
review denied (Minn. Oct.
Osborne v. Chapman 574 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 1998
Osborne v. Chapman 574 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 1998
In reaching this conclusion, the court relied upon its earlier decision in United Fire & pet.
Osborne v. Chapman 562 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Osborne v. Chapman 562 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Chapman argues that he, like Osborne, is an insured of MSI.
Lott v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 527 N.W.2d 164 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Lott v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 527 N.W.2d 164 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
The only potentially relevant Minnesota case is United Fire & (Minn.App.
Blohm v. Johnson 523 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Blohm v. Johnson 523 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
The trial court dismissed Blohm’s subrogation claim against tenant Johnson, relying on United Fire & •pet.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by