James Poehler v. Cincinnati Insurance Company
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SMITH, Judge.
We reverse the district court’s judgment granting preaward interest under Minn. Stat. § 549.09, subd. 1(b) (2014), ■ because the statute does not apply to appraisal awards pursuant to an insurance- policy in the absence of an underlying breach of contract or actionable wrongdoing.
FACTS
Appellant Cincinnati Insurance Company (Cincinnati) insured respondent James Poehler under a homeowner’s insurance policy, which provided replacement-cost coverage for Poehler’s home and personal property. As required by the statute governing fire insurance policies issued in Minnesota, the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Birdsall v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- ICC Leasing Corp. v. Midwestern MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Duxbury v. Spex Feeds, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- Krueger v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
- Auto-Owners Insurance Co. v. Second Chance Investments, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Poehler v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
- Herll v. Auto Owners Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2018