News

Minnesota Statute § 60A.41(a) prohibits an insurance company from “proceed[ing] against its insured in a subrogation action where the loss was caused by the nonintentional act of the insured.” (Emphasis added.)

Robert W. Kettering, Jr., 69, died on April 22, 2018. Bob was a consummate lawyer, endearing father, and caring husband. Bob was diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer’s disease several years ago, which forced him to leave the law practice that he dearly loved in 2011.

Small-town values and big-city litigation have helped fashion the philosophy of TCCA president Shayne Hamann.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has determined that employers and insurers are not responsible for disability benefits resulting from undertaking medical treatment that is not causally related to a work injury.

In Hohlt v. University of Minnesota, filed on June 28, 2017, the Minnesota Supreme Court has limited the scope of its prior decision in Dykhoff v. Xcel Energy, 840 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. 2013). The Hohlt decision will immediately impact how cases are analyzed with regard to the “arising out of” and “in the course of” compensability determinations, and may very well impact cases that are currently in litigation.

In a decision issued by the Minnesota Supreme Court on May 3, 2017, the Court significantly raised the level of importance of the contents of a Rehabilitation Plan prepared as part of a workers’ compensation matter. In Gilbertson v. Williams Dingmann, LLC, File No. A16-0895 (May 3, 2017), the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that an employer and insurer cannot discontinue temporary total disability (“TTD”) benefits when the employee rejected a job offer from the date-of-injury employer because the Rehabilitation Plan identified the vocational goal as return to work to a “different employer.”

On April 5, 2017, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued Wilbur v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., applying "proceeds awarded" for purposes of Minnesota's first-party bad faith statute to unambiguously mean the judgment amount entered by the district court on the claim for benefits, an amount which is capped by the insurance policy’s limit.

Does Minn. Stat. § 227.271 Create a Private Right of Action for Violations of Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations and their Minnesota Analogues? by Jeffrey J. Woltjen and James F. Mewborn Minnesota Chapter 221 regulates both interstate and intrastate motor carriers operating in Minnesota. The statutes largely adopt the federal motor carrier legislation, known as the Federal Motor Safety Carrier Regulations (“FMCSRs”), codified as 49 C.F.R. §§ 300.01 et seq., which set forth the mandatory safety regulations that motor carriers must follow in the course of transporting persons or property for business purposes.

Shayne M. Hamann has been elected president of the Twin Cities Claims Association [TCCA]. The group is a local organization made up of claims professionals, attorneys and vendors within the insurance community who gather for educational programs and networking opportunities.

328 Barry Ave., LLC v. Nolan Properties Group, LLC, 871 N.W.2d 745 (Minn. Nov. 25, 2015) Contractors everywhere experienced a slight setback when the Minnesota Supreme Court issued its opinion on November 25, 2015, in 328 Barry Ave., LLC v. Nolan Properties Group, LLC. The Minnesota Supreme Court agreed with the general contractor that the statute of limitations on claims for defective construction can begin to run before substantial completion of the construction, under Minn. Stat. § 541.051; however, the court refused to expand “discovery of the injury” to include a leak, previously remedied, such that the two year statute of limitations under Minn. Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1 would bar Plaintiff’s claims.

Arthur Chapman is pleased to announce it has been selected for membership in Mackrell International. Mackrell International is one of the world’s largest networks of independent law firms, providing access to 90 firms across 60 countries.

Kafi Linville obtained a defense verdict in the case Penner v. Wutzke and Sundby Trailer Sales, a personal injury action that was tried in Sherburne County, Minnesota in March 2015. Plaintiff, a 56 year-old male, was rear-ended by Defendant Wutzke as a result of a phantom semi-truck that had pulled out in front of them when turning onto the highway of which they were both traveling. Plaintiff alleged soft tissue neck injuries and headaches as a direct result of the accident requiring RFN treatments and chiropractic care for the remainder of his life.

Arthur Chapman Defense Verdict for Canadian Pacific