Savchuk v. Randal Rush
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
Sheran, Chief Justice.
Appeal by defendant, Randal Rush, and garnishee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm), from an order by the district court granting plaintiff’s motion to file and serve a supplemental complaint and denying appellants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. We affirm the decision of the trial court for these reasons:(1) Minn. St. 571.41, subd. 2, was enacted by the legislature *482to permit garnishment of an insurer’s obligation to an insured, even though not due absolutely and without contingency.(2) Rule 4.04(2), Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides in…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Seider v. RothNew York Court of Appeals · 1966
- Hunt v. Nevada State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
- Simpson v. LoehmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Rush v. SavchukSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Hoff v. KemptonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Fraley v. Estate of OedingOhio Supreme Court · 2014
- Savchuk v. RushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Darr v. LongNebraska Supreme Court · 1981
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.