Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hanson v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co., 417 N.W.2d 94.

36 citing documents.

Amanda Grace Visser, Minn. 2020
Co. , see also Latterell, d at 923 (explaining that primary UIM coverage “follows the vehicle rather than the insured” ).
Amanda Grace Visser, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Co. , d 94, 96 (Minn. 1987).
Jamy Hegseth f/k/a Jamy Jager v. American Family Mutual Insurance Group 877 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 2016
Jamy Hegseth f/k/a Jamy Jager v. American Family Mutual Insurance Group 877 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 2016
Co., ); see also Hanson, d at 96 (explaining that in enacting subdivision 3a(5), the Legislature’s intent was to overturn the prior rule that UM *197 insurance follows the person rather than the vehicle and instead ensure that primary UM coverage is tied to the vehicle involved in the accident).
Latterell v. Progressive Northern Insurance Co. 801 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 2011
Latterell v. Progressive Northern Insurance Co. 801 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 2011
WEST BEND MUT. INS. v. Allstate Ins. 776 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 2009
WEST BEND MUT. INS. v. Allstate Ins. 776 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 2009
Co., (noting that the statute designates "the occupied motor vehicle as the primary source of uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage").
Stewart v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 727 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Distinguished Stewart v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 727 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Turner v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 675 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 2004
Turner v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 675 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 2004
Braginsky v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 624 N.W.2d 789 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Braginsky v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 624 N.W.2d 789 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Schons v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 621 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 2001
Schons v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 621 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 2001
Co., (recognizing that the 1985 amendments to the No-Fault Act “reflect a broad policy decision to tie underinsured motorist and other coverage to the particular vehicle involved in an accident”).
Becker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 611 N.W.2d 7 Minn. 2000
Becker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 611 N.W.2d 7 Minn. 2000
Northrup v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 601 N.W.2d 900 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Northrup v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 601 N.W.2d 900 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Norton v. Tri-State Insurance Co. of Minnesota 590 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Norton v. Tri-State Insurance Co. of Minnesota 590 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Ka Ying Vue v. State Farm Insurance Companies 582 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 1998
Ka Ying Vue v. State Farm Insurance Companies 582 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 1998
LaFave v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 510 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
LaFave v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 510 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. v. Willey 481 N.W.2d 146 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Milwaukee Mutual Insurance Co. v. Willey 481 N.W.2d 146 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Co., the court held that Minn.Stat.
Roering v. Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. 444 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 1989
Roering v. Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. 444 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 1989
Co., we interpreted the language of Minn.Stat.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Zurich Insurance Co. 439 N.W.2d 751 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Zurich Insurance Co. 439 N.W.2d 751 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Thommen v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 437 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 1989
Thommen v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 437 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 1989
Broton v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co. 428 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1988
Broton v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co. 428 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1988