Legal Opinion

Kastning v. State Farm Insurance Companies

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided September 24, 2012No. A12-0584PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HOOTEN, Judge.

Appellants challenge the district court’s summary-judgment dismissal of their claim for uninsured motorist coverage under a policy issued by respondent, arguing that the farm tractor with which they collided was an uninsured “motor vehicle” within the meaning of their policy and, alternatively, that they are entitled to coverage under the reasonable-expectations doctrine. We affirm.

FACTS

On July 2, 2010, appellant Bruce Kastn-ing was driving a 1996 Chevrolet pickup truck when it collided with a John Deere 3020 farm tractor with an attached disc mower driven by Raymond…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  2. Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  3. DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  4. Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  5. Hubred v. Control Data Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Economy Premier Assurance Co. v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
  2. Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2017
  3. United Financial Casualty Co. v. NelsonDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2015
  4. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance v. MartiDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2016
  5. Brotherhood Mutual Insurance Company v. Evangelical Free Church of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API