Bergeson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026) Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Minnesota statutes cited
Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of Donald Bergeson for further review of the decision of the Court of Appeals be, and the same is, granted. The petitioner shall proceed as the appellant and briefs shall be filed in the quantity, form and within the time limitations contained in Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 131 and 132. Counsel shall address the following issues in their briefs:
1. Does Minn.Stat. § 176.82 apply to insurance carriers?
2. Does a cause of action lie against an insurance carrier for tortious conduct in the form of intentional harassment by delay or termination of payment or treatment?
3. Assuming a civil action can be brought under Minn.Stat. § 176.82 or in tort against an insurance carrier, was the insurance carrier’s conduct in this case sufficiently egregious so as to enable petitioners to reach the jury with their claim?
Counsel will be notified at a later date of the time for argument before this court. No requests for extensions of time for the filin£ of briefs will be entertained.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.