Legal Opinion

Rehnelt v. Stuebe

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 14, 1986No. C9-85-1781PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY OPINION

WOZNIAK, Judge.

FACTS

DuWayne Rehnelt commenced a negligence action seeking reimbursement for uncompensated economic loss incurred by him as a result of a two-car accident. For the purposes of the action, the parties stipulated that Robin Stuebe’s negligence was the cause of the accident. At the time of the accident, Rehnelt’s vehicle was not in*678sured under a plan of reparation security. Thus, he did not have no-fault coverage for basic economic loss benefits. As a result of the accident, Rehnelt incurred medical expenses of $785. Upon cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Chaney v. LiebermanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  2. Rehnelt v. StuebeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Rehnelt v. StuebeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API