Legal Opinion

Banks v. Grant

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 2, 1995No. C7-94-2225PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NORTON, Judge.

Appellants contend the trial court erred when it held that an offset against the verdict was not appropriate because American Family had a subrogation right against the Grants and their insurer under Minn.Stat. § 65B.64, subd. 2 (1994). We reverse and remand.

FACTS

This case arises out of a 1990 automobile accident. Appellant Damon Banks was a passenger in an automobile that was struck by an automobile driven by Prince Martin. The owner of the vehicle, appellant Russell Grant, had given appellant George Grant permission to use the vehicle; George Grant then allowed Prince…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Milbrandt v. American Legion Post of MoraSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Mohs v. Parrish's BarSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  3. Mueller v. TheisCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
  4. Fox v. City of HoldingfordCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Banks v. GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API