Posts Categorized: blog

Personal Injury and Uninsured Motorist Benefits: Court holds that “Coverage Available” For Excess UIM Coverage Equals the Difference Between the UIM Benefits Paid to the Insured from the Occupied Vehicle and the Excess UIM Policy’s Limit.

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently held that the term “coverage available” for excess UIM coverage refers to benefits paid to the insured under the coverage provided by the occupied vehicle’s policy, not the occupied vehicle’s UIM policy limit.  In Sleiter v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., — N.W.2d —, No. A13-1596, (Minn. Aug. 5, 2015),… Read more »

Robert Kuderer Named Super Lawyer

Congratulations to Robert Kuderer from the Erickson Law Firm who was once again selected by his peers as a Super Lawyer by Super Lawyers magazine.  Mr. Kuderer has been perennially honored as a “Super Lawyer” over the past 15 years.  

No Replacement? No Problem! Minnesota Supreme Court Holds That No-Fault Claimant Can Recover The Value of Services Not Replaced.

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently held that Minnesota’s No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act allows an injured person who provides care and maintenance of a home as a full-time responsibility to recover the reasonable value of care and maintenance services, regardless of whether the services were actually replaced.  In Schroeder v. Western National Mut. Ins. Co., —… Read more »

No-Fault Act Permits UIM Policies To Limit Coverage To Persons Who Suffer “Bodily Injury” In Wrongful Death Actions

The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that a policy providing underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage only to “insureds” who sustain “bodily injury” in a motor vehicle accident complies with the Minnesota No-Fault Act.  The published opinion Hanbury v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., — N.W.2d –, No. A14-1746 (Minn. App. June 15, 2015), involved a… Read more »

No Underinsured Motorist Coverage for Insured’s Collision with a Snowmobile

A Minnesota federal court recently held that an insured who collided with a snowmobile was not entitled to underinsured motorist benefits under the terms of the policy.  In United Financial Casualty Co. v. Nelson, No. CIV. 14-816 JRT/LIB (D. Minn. May 18, 2015), United insured, under a Commercial Auto Policy (“the Policy”), a semi-tractor and trailer… Read more »