Legal Opinion
McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided October 16, 1991No. CX-91-261PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SHORT, Judge.
In a case involving insurance coverage, Twaya McIntosh argues the trial court erred as a matter of law in granting summary judgment for State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company because (1) innocent persons should be compensated for all injuries arising out of the use of an uninsured’s automobile, and (2) an “accident” is not a prerequisite to the payment of no-fault benefits. We disagree and affirm.
FACTS
The parties have stipulated to the facts. On the morning of October 1, 1987, McIntosh’s former boyfriend sat in his car outside her house. When McIntosh, her minor…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & ClinicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Hibbing Education Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Iowa Kemper Insurance Co. v. StoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
- Continental Western Insurance Co. v. KlugSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Ulrich v. United Services Automobile Ass'nWyoming Supreme Court · 1992
- Dornfeld v. ObergCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- McIntosh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.