Cantu v. Atlanta Casualty Companies
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)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 2007, among the opinions in this site’s citation index. 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.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Toni Brill v. Mid-Century Insurance Company (8th Cir. 2020)
- Schossow Ex Rel. Schossow v. First National Insurance Co. of America (Minn. Ct. App. 2007)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of the Atlanta Casualty Companies for further review of the court of appeals’ decision filed June 6, 1995 be, and the same is, granted for the sole purpose of reversing *292 that decision and reinstating the summary judgment entered in favor of the petitioner in the Kandiyohi County District Court. The record demonstrates that after the insured had relocated to Minnesota, the automobile insurance policy had not been “renewed, delivered or issued for delivery, or executed in the state,” events which would have required this insurer to provide uninsured motorist coverage to a state resident. See Minn.Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(l) (1992). The cumulative analysis of AMCO Ins. Co. v. Lang, 420 N.W.2d 895 (Minn. 1988); and Hauer v. Integrity Mut. Ins. Co., 352 N.W.2d 406 (Minn. 1984) requires the conclusion that Minn.Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(l) (1992) is inapplicable.
Summary judgment for the petitioner is reinstated.
BY THE COURT:
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.