Legal Opinion
Norton v. Tri-State Insurance Co. of Minnesota
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 30, 1999No. C1-98-1614PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CRIPPEN, Judge.
In this declaratory judgment proceeding, appellant Steve Norton contends that he has first-party coverage with two companies for injuries sustained in a December 1994 collision of an uninsured motorist with appellant’s Chevrolet automobile. Payment of Norton’s claims has been tendered by Austin Mutual Insurance Company, whose policy Norton purchased after he bought the Chevrolet in August 1994. Respondent Tri-State Insurance Company of Minnesota provided uncommon coverage on the same vehicle, its policy having been purchased by the prior owner of the Chevrolet and left…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- A. J. Chromy Construction Co. v. Commercial Mechanical Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Integrity Mutual Insurance v. State Automobile & Casualty Underwriters InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Nygaard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- Rusthoven v. Commercial Standard Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Hanson v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- Boatwright v. BudakCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Lane v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- WEST BEND MUT. INS. v. Allstate Ins.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2009