Legal Opinion
Stoebe v. Merastar Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 19, 1996No. CX-95-1144PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PETERSON, Judge.
On appeal from the denial of a new trial motion, Merastar Insurance Company challenges the district court’s determination that Minn.R.Civ.P. 68 applied to an offer of judgment made two days before trial began. We reverse and remand.
FACTS
After being injured in an automobile accident, respondent Kay Stoebe began this lawsuit against appellant Merastar Insurance Company to collect uninsured motorist benefits. In December 1994, the district court issued an order setting the case for trial sometime between March 13, 1995 and April 14, 1995. On March 21, 1995, knowing trial…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic SecuritySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- House v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Greenwood v. StevensonDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stoebe v. Merastar Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996