Legal Opinion

Elwood v. Horace Mann Insurance Co.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 16, 1995No. C2-94-2116PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KLAPHAKE, Judge.

Appellant James A. Elwood (Elwood) sued his insurer, respondent Horace Mann Company (Horace Mann), to compel arbitration of an underinsured motorist (UIM) claim or to declare Horace Mann “has suffered no prejudice from lack of a Schmidt-Clothier notice and/or has otherwise waived or is estopped to raise the Schmidt-Clothier issue as a defense.” See Schmidt v. Clothier, 338 N.W.2d 256, 263 (Minn.1983). Following a trial, the court concluded Elwood forfeited his right of action against Horace Mann for UIM benefits. This appeal followed the court’s denial of Elwood’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Schmidt v. ClothierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  2. Broton v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  3. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. BaumannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  4. Anda Construction Co. v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, DuluthCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  5. Olson v. Blue Cross and Blue ShieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kluball v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API