Legal Opinion
Hertz Corp. v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 28, 1998No. C3-96-2050PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GARDEBRING, Justice.
This case involves the application of the Minnesota No-Fault Act in the context of rental cars. Specifically, we are asked to determine whether a self-insured rental car agency may meet its obligations under the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn.Stat. §§ 65B.41-.71(1996) (“No-Fault Act”), by providing liability coverage only in the event that the renter or operator of the rented vehicle does not have other liability coverage arising from his or her own automobile policy.
Jeffrey Powers rented an automobile from Hertz in August 1994. While driving the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Christensen v. Minneapolis Municipal Employees Retirement BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Garrick v. Northland Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Interstate Fire & Casualty Co. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Streich v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Hauer v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- American Family Insurance Group v. SchroedlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- Lobeck v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. v. Mid-Century Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2011
- Benigni v. County of St. LouisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Bowers v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1998
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.