Legal Opinion
Klein v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided February 27, 1990No. C5-89-1771PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EDWARD D. MULALLY, Judge.
Appellant challenges a judgment declaring that respondent was not “occupying” his vehicle within the meaning of Minn. Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(5) (1988), when he was injured while changing a flat tire. The trial court concluded respondent is entitled to select uninsured motorist coverage from either of two insurance companies.
We reverse.
FACTS
The parties stipulated to the following facts.
On July 25, 1988, respondent Darrel J. Klein was driving a 1982 Chevrolet S-10 pickup owned by his wife, Joyce, on Clay County Highway 7, looking for work as a custom harvester.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Robson v. Lightning Rod Mutual InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
- Glen Paul Court Neighborhood Ass'n v. PasterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- MacKie v. Unigard Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
- Balderrama v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- DeStefano v. Oregon Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Adkins v. MeadorWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
- Genthner v. Progressive Casualty InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Horace Mann Insurance Co. v. NeuvilleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
- Cuevas v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2001
- Allied Mutual Insurance Co. v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.