Legal Opinion
Essling v. Markman
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 24, 1983No. CO-82-1041PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TODD, Justice.
William W. Essling and Richard L. Lehr challenge the constitutionality and enforcement of Minn.Stat. §§ 62A.31-42 (1982), which prohibit the sale of insurance policies to persons age 65 or older which purport to supplement Medicare health insurance, unless certain statutory requirements are met. The trial court granted relief only with respect to travel insurance policies. We affirm.
Essling and Lehr are both over the age of 65. They claim that the state has wrongfully interfered with their right of contract and their right to privacy because of their age. They claim this…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Nebbia v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States v. Carolene Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Ferguson v. SkrupaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Skeen v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- Women of the State v. GomezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Matter of SchmidtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- State v. EverettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- In Re Estate of TurnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.