Legal Opinion

Oberstar v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 18, 1974No. 44488PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

This appeal arises as a result of a collision between two uninsured snowmobiles. It presents for our consideration several issues regarding the applicability of the uninsured motorist coverage in plaintiff’s automobile insurance policy to such a collision. Since we agree with the trial court that under the particular circumstances of this case the uninsured motorist coverage was applicable, we affirm its judgment for plaintiff.

Plaintiff, William M. Oberstar, was the owner of an automobile insured by defendant, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. Plaintiff also owned an Arctic Cat…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Nygaard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  2. Stepec v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. American Motorist Insurance Co. v. SarvelaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  2. Vaillancourt v. Concord General Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
  3. State Automobile & Casualty Underwriters v. RuniaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. United Financial Casualty Co. v. NelsonDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2015
  5. Gudvangen v. Austin Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979

1 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