Legal Opinion
Richards v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 5, 1988No. C3-87-890PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
In December of 1986, appellants, Phillip Richards and Nicholas Stevens, sought a declaration that respondent, Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company, had a duty to defend and indemnify them in a law suit brought against them by a former employee. The trial court found that the complaint in question was not covered by the policy issued by respondent and that there was no duty to defend. Appellants appeal from the summary judgment awarded to respondent. We affirm.
FACTS
Appellants, who owned an agency in Rochester, Minnesota, were general agents for Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Betlach v. Wayzata CondominiumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Bobich v. OjaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Prahm v. Rupp Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Simon v. Milwaukee Automobile Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- SCHOOL DIST. NO. 1, ETC. v. Mission Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Massamont Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Utica Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2007
- Golf Course Superintendents Ass'n of America v. Underwriters at Lloyd'sDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1991
- Independent School District No. 697 v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Transcontinental Ins. v. Caliber One Indemnity Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2005
- St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. National Real Estate Clearinghouse, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.