Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Spartz

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 19, 1999No. CX-98-1143PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ANDERSON, Judge.

This appeal is from a permanent injunction barring no-fault insurance benefits based on a theory of collateral estoppel. Because we conclude that reimbursement of actual income loss under the Minnesota No-Fault Act is not barred by reason of application of collateral estoppel arising from an underin-sured motorist verdict, we reverse.

FACTS

Appellant, James Spartz, was injured in a motor vehicle accident while a passenger in the vehicle of Ernest Knapper. Appellant incurred medical and income loss expenses resulting from the accident. At the time of the accident,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Southern Pacific Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  3. Johnson v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  4. Aufderhar v. Data Dispatch, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  5. Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. v. Hvidsten Transport, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1964

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Nelson v. American Family Insurance GroupSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  2. Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Dennis Buchanan Robert Bonynge Gerald L. Buchanan Broadway Visuals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
  3. Dixon v. Depositors Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
  4. State v. N.G.K.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  5. Brown-Wilbert, Inc. v. Copeland Buhl & Co., P.L.L.P.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006

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

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

Powered by the Exa API