Horace Mann Insurance Company v. Westenfield

Minnesota Supreme Court
Horace Mann Insurance Company v. Westenfield, 496 N.W.2d 410 (Minn. 1993)
1993 Minn. LEXIS 193; 1993 WL 84936

Can I rely on this case?

Yes — no negative treatment found

Based on 1 citing opinion

Analysis generated from citing opinions in this archive. Not legal advice.

Horace Mann Insurance Company v. Westenfield

Opinion

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Company for further review of an unpublished decision of the court of appeals be, and the same is, granted, the decision is reversed and the judgment entered in the trial court in favor of the petitioner Minnesota Mutual is reinstated.

MEMORANDUM

The decision of the court of appeals has confused and therefore misapplied principles of No-Fault first-party coverage to *411 this question which only involves third-party liability coverage. Our decision in West Bend Mutual Ins. Co. v. Milwaukee Mutual Ins. Co., 384 N.W.2d 877 (Minn. 1986) is controlling and dispositive.

Reference

Full Case Name
HORACE MANN INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. Bruce Allen WESTENFIELD, Et Al., Appellants, Michael Albert Dandrea, Respondent, and Minnesota Mutual Fire & Casualty Company, Intervenor, Respondent
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published