Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Schmidt v. Clothier, 338 N.W.2d 256.

182 citing documents.

Butzer v. Allstate Insurance Co. 567 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Butzer v. Allstate Insurance Co. 567 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Washington v. Milbank Insurance Co. 562 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 1997
Washington v. Milbank Insurance Co. 562 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 1997
the Washingtons informed Milbank that they had reached a settlement with Presley and offered Milbank the opportunity to substitute its $20,000 draft for State Farm’s draft, thereby preserving any subrogation rights Milbank had against Presley and State Farm.
Schoffman Ex Rel. Schoffman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Minnesota 557 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Schoffman Ex Rel. Schoffman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Minnesota 557 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Blue Cross’s subrogation rights depend, however, not just on the policy, but also “on ‘general principles of equity and the nature of the contract of insurance.’ ” (quoting Bacich v. Homeland Ins.
Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 552 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1996
Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 552 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1996
With respect to claims against underinsured motorists the policy incorporates the notice provisions concerning a and it also requires the insured to allow the insurer 30 days in which to meet the settlement offer in order to preserve the insurer’s rights against the tortfeasor.
Washington v. Milbank Insurance Co. 551 N.W.2d 513 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Washington v. Milbank Insurance Co. 551 N.W.2d 513 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In December 1993, respondents informed appellant of the terms of the settlement agreement with the tortfeasor and State Farm, and offered appellant the opportunity to substitute its $20,000 draft for State Farm’s
Hermeling v. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Co. 548 N.W.2d 270 Minn. 1996
Hermeling v. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Co. 548 N.W.2d 270 Minn. 1996
On July 13, 1989, Minnesota Fire substituted its own check in the amount of $30,000 to Hermeling in place of American States’ check in order to preserve its subro-gation rights against Johnson and Lessard.
Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 541 N.W.2d 4 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 541 N.W.2d 4 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
-61 (Minn.1983), the supreme court was asked to determine whether the following exhaustion clause was enforceable: We will pay under this [UIM] coverage only after the limits of liability under any applicable bodily injury liability bonds or policies have been exhausted by payment of judgments or settlements.
Dairyland Insurance Co. v. Starkey 535 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1995
Dean v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 535 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 1995
Dean v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 535 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 1995
Dairyland Insurance Co. v. Starkey 535 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1995
§ 65B.42(1) (1994) (emphasis added)
Hermeling v. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Co. 534 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Hermeling v. Minnesota Fire & Casualty Co. 534 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
requires this court to hold that an insurer’s cause of action does not accrue until the day it substitutes its check.
Elwood v. Horace Mann Insurance Co. 531 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Elwood v. Horace Mann Insurance Co. 531 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Appellant James A. Elwood (Elwood) sued his insurer, respondent Horace Mann Company (Horace Mann), to compel arbitration of an underinsured motorist (UIM) claim or to declare Horace Mann “has suffered no prejudice from lack of a Schmidt-Clothier notice and/or has otherwise waived or is estopped to raise the Schmidt-Clothier issue as a defense.”
Carlson v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 527 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Carlson v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 527 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
The Carlsons notified their insurance carrier, MSI, of their intent to settle with the other driver’s insurer ( notice).
Singh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 523 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Singh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 523 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Behrens v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 763 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Behrens v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 763 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
After being injured in a car accident, respondent John T. Behrens entered into a liability settlement with the tortfeasor without providing notice to appellant American Family Mutual Insurance Company, Beh-rens’s underinsurance carrier, -63 (Minn.1983).
Richards v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 518 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1994
Richards v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 518 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1994
Beaudry v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 518 N.W.2d 11 Minn. 1994
Beaudry v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 518 N.W.2d 11 Minn. 1994
*12 (Minn.1983), but it elected not to substitute its own settlement draft.
Drake v. Ryan 514 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1994
Drake v. Ryan 514 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1994
where we recognized that “[enforcement of policy exhaustion clauses would * * * serve to force an insured to litigate the claim to final judgment in order to exhaust the policy claim limits.” Id.
Richards v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 505 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Richards v. Milwaukee Insurance Co. 505 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Appellant agreed to settle with Grosskreutz’s insurer for $20,000
Beaudry v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 506 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Beaudry v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 506 N.W.2d 673 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State Farm was given the opportunity to substitute its check for that of Colonial within thirty days and thereby preserve its subrogation rights against Defoe.
Beukhof v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 502 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Beukhof v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co. 502 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Drake v. Ryan 498 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Drake v. Ryan 498 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Schantz v. Richview, Inc.
Employers Mutual Companies v. Nordstrom 495 N.W.2d 855 Minn. 1993
Employers Mutual Companies v. Nordstrom 495 N.W.2d 855 Minn. 1993
we held this clause invalid as contrary to the No-Fault Act, Minn.Stat.
Share Health Plan, Inc. v. Marcotte 495 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Share Health Plan, Inc. v. Marcotte 495 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Share’s is also misplaced.
Junker v. Allstate Insurance Co. 489 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Junker v. Allstate Insurance Co. 489 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(notice to settlement to claimant’s insurer preserves underinsurance rights, although general release given to tortfeasor).
Sargent v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 486 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Sargent v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 486 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(insurer exhaustion clauses held void as against the public policy of the No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn.Stat.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by