Legal Opinion
Eiynk v. Sabrowsky
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 6, 1994No. C6-94-1101PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LANSING, Judge.
An insurer and a judgment creditor dispute the application of Canadian Universal Insurance Co. v. Fire Watch, Inc. We affirm the district court’s interpretation that an added household exclusion is a substantial coverage reduction that is void for lack of notice under Canadian Universal. We further hold that a mutually agreed increase in the amount of coverage remains in effect. Affirmed as modified.
FACTS
North Star Mutual issued a liability insurance policy to David Sabrowsky in November 1979. The policy provided $100,000 of coverage for claims brought by persons,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Atwater Creamery Co. v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Canadian Universal Insurance Co. v. Fire Watch, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Silesky Ex Rel. Silesky v. KelmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Anderson Ex Rel. Anderson v. StreamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Hauer v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Schupp v. United Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012