Legal Opinion
Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided February 9, 1996No. C1-95-1274PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KLAPHAKE, Judge.
Appellants David E. Malmin and Jeanette Malmin 1 (Malmin) brought this action against respondent Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Company (Minnesota Mutual) to recover underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits. Malmin moved for summary judgment, arguing that a policy provision requiring Minnesota Mutual’s written consent to any suit against a tortfeasor was void, unenforceable and against public policy.
The district court denied Malmin’s motion for summary judgment, but granted his request to certify the following question as important and doubtful under Minn.R.Civ. App.P.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Schmidt v. ClothierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Employers Mutual Companies v. NordstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- Emme v. C.O.M.B., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Foley v. Honeywell, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Richards v. Milwaukee Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- In re Guardianship of JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2023
- Malmin v. Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996