Legal Opinion

Folstad v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 17, 1973No. 43740PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Minn. St. 1967, § 72A.149, 1 since amended, 2 mandated uninsured mo torist coverage in automobile liability insurance policies unless such coverage was rejected in writing. An exemption from this written-rejection requirement was provided for transactions involving the renewal of a policy where the coverage had previously been rejected by the insured. The issue in this case is whether the statutory requirement of written rejection applies in a situation where a policy, issued prior to the effective date of § 72A.149, is amended after the effective date so as to include an additional driver…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Murphy v. Milbank Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  2. Jacobson v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  3. Barrett v. LawrenceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1982
  4. Iverson v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2011
  5. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. v. MetPath, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API