Legal Opinion

Heim v. Lee

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided December 17, 2002No. C2-02-1174, C0-02-1190PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HARTEN, Judge.

An insured brought this action for a declaratory judgment that the retroactive reformation of his insurance policy was valid. The insured, the insurer, and the insurance agent moved for summary judgment. A third party whose'right to recover from the special compensation fund was precluded by the retroactive reformation opposed the motion. The district court found that the retroactive reformation was invalid and granted summary judgment to the third party. The insured and-the insurance agent appeal.

FACTS

Michael and Tami Heim (collectively Heim) operate a farm. In early…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Warner v. ZaiserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  2. Leamington Co. v. Nonprofits' Ins. Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  3. Nolan v. StuebnerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
  4. Manderfeld v. KrovitzCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
  5. Olsen v. KlingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Free Spirit Publishing Inc. v. DworskyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2022
  2. GuideOne National Insurance Company v. Systems 2000 Plumbing Service, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API