Legal Opinion

Hooper v. Zurich American Insurance Co.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 23, 1996No. C9-96-108PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Appellants sued respondents, their insurers, for defense and indemnification in two lawsuits after judgment had been rendered against appellants in one suit and the other had settled unfavorably to them. Respondents were awarded summary judgment on the grounds that the lawsuits had never been tendered to respondents as required by appellants’ policies and that respondents were prejudiced by appellants’ failure to tender the actions prior to incurring liability. Because we hold that where an insurance policy mandates notice to the company as the means of tendering…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  2. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  3. SCSC Corp. v. Allied Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
  4. Waseca Mutual Insurance Co. v. NoskaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  5. Meister v. Western National Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Prince George's County v. Local Government Insurance TrustCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  2. Wooddale Builders, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  3. North Star Mutual Insurance Co v. Midwest Family Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  4. Food Market Merchandising, Inc v. Scottsdale Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
  5. Winthrop & Weinstine v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1998

6 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