Legal Opinion
Haarstad v. Graff
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 30, 1994No. C4-93-308, C9-93-546PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAGE, Justice.
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (State Farm) seeks review of a court of appeals decision holding State Farm had a duty to defend its insured, Brian Graff, in an action for damages where the injured party, John Haarstad, alleged Graff negligently injured him. At trial, State Farm argued Graff intentionally injured Haarstad and the damages caused thereby were excluded from coverage under the intentional act exclusion of the policy. The jury found Graff did not act intentionally. The trial court, the Honorable Harlan L. Nelson presiding, then ruled the claim was covered…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Miller v. ShugartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Iowa Kemper Insurance Co. v. StoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
- Prahm v. Rupp Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Canadian Universal Insurance Co. v. Fire Watch, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Brown v. State Automobile & Casualty UnderwritersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- Thommes v. Milwaukee Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- General Casualty Co. of Wisconsin v. Wozniak Travel, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- Remodeling Dimensions, Inc. v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- Christensen v. Milbank Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- Home Insurance Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance of PittsburghSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.