Gilman v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HARTEN, Judge.
Appellants Frank and Dawn Gilman (the Gilmans) challenge the trial court’s denial of their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, claiming that the jury’s finding that Brian Larson did not intend to injure Frank Gilman when he tackled him entitles them to coverage under Larson’s homeowner’s insurance policy. Alternatively, the Gilmans argue that they are entitled to a new trial because the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the definition of “accident” and in framing special interrogatories. Respondent State Farm Fire & Casualty (State Farm) claims…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hauenstein v. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- ZumBerge v. Northern States Power Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Rettman v. City of LitchfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Alevizos v. METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COM'NCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
- Milbank Insurance Co. v. B.L.G.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- American Family Insurance Co. v. WalserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Rebel v. Nodak Mutual Insurance Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1998
- Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. DuffyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
- Meadowbrook, Inc. v. Tower Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
- Rohrer v. RickCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.