Legal Opinion · Dissent

Meister v. Western National Mutual Insurance

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 17, 1992No. C1-90-1997Published

1DissentSimonett, Justice

I respectfully dissent.

*380When Michael Meister was thrown off the pickup truck, he was entitled to no-fault economic loss benefits. But from whose policy? The answer, at least up until now, has been to look to Minn.Stat. § 65B.47 (1988), entitled “Priority of Applicability of Security for Payment of Basic Economic Loss Benefits.”

Subdivision 1 of the Priority Statute provides that if Michael was injured while driving or occupying a motor vehicle “while the vehicle is being used in the business of transporting persons or property,” the basic economic loss benefits are to be paid by the insurance…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wasche v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  2. Koons v. National Family Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  3. Murphy v. Milbank Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Meister v. WESTERN NAT. MUT. INS. CO.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API