Legal Opinion
Lee v. Hunt
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 2, 2002No. C9-01-1730PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge. *
Two months after judgment was entered for appellant, respondent moved to amend the judgment by deducting collateral source benefits brought under Minn.Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 1 (2000), of the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, which contains no deadline for filing such a motion. Appellant objected to the timeliness of the motion, arguing that the ten-day deadline of the collateral source statute, Minn.Stat. § 548.36, subd. 2 (2000), applies to motions for deductions brought pursuant to the no-fault act and that, therefore, the motion to amend the judgment was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Imlay v. City of Lake CrystalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Wertish v. SalvhusSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Braginsky v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Wertish v. SalvhusCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
3Cited by3 opinions
- Do v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- Ayers v. KalalCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019
- Gaertner Ex Rel. Minnesota State Patrol v. One 1999 Dodge Pickup Truck, MN Lic. No. GKR-391Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003