Legal Opinion
McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided August 28, 1992No. CX-91-261Published
1Opinion of the Court
488 N.W.2d 476 (1992)
Twaya Vienna McINTOSH, Petitioner, Appellant,
v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.
No. CX-91-261.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
August 28, 1992.
Thomas F. Van Horn, St. Paul, for appellant.
Bradley T. Cosgriff, Hopkins, for respondent.
Sharon L. Van Dyck, Schwebel, Goetz & Sieben, Minneapolis, for amicus curiae, MN Trial Lawyers Ass'n.
Heard, considered, and decided by the court en banc.
SIMONETT, Justice.
May an intentional assault qualify as an "accident" for purposes of either no-fault or uninsured motorist coverage or both?
On October 1, 1987, Robert…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Continental Western Insurance Co. v. KlugSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- McCarthy v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- Leatherby Insurance Company v. WilloughbyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
- McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Weis v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.