Legal Opinion

Farmers Union Agency, Inc. v. Butenhoff

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided November 16, 1992No. Civ. 4-92-387PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

DIANA E. MURPHY, Chief Judge.

Farmers Union Agency (Farmers) and its parent companies commenced this declaratory judgement action seeking the court to declare that Minnesota Statute § 60A.177 is not to be applied retroactively and that the statute is unconstitutional as applied to pre-existing contracts between insurance agents, insurers, and their general agents. Now before the court is plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgement.

I

This case involves Minnesota Statute § 60A.177 concerning the involuntary terminations of agents by insurers. Minn. Stat. § 60A.177 (1991)…

2Cases cited13 opinions

Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
Allied Structural Steel Co. v. SpannausSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

In Re Workers Compensation RefundDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1994
American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. LindsayCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993