Morrison exception (Minnesota) · Go Syfert
← Minnesota issues

Morrison exception in Minnesota

5 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2003 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
American Standard Insurance Co. v. Legreen
minn · 1996 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2002–2003
2 sentences

2003Furthermore, the court concluded that even if attorney fees were recoverable, 3M would not be entitled to an award of attorney fees here because the district court found that 3M suffered no legally recognizable damages as a result of any breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and, therefore, 3M failed to establish that any damages flowed directly from the alleged breach. *424 3M asserts that we recognized the potential application of the Morrison exception outside of the duty to defend context in American Standard Insurance Co. v. Le, 551 N.W.2d 923 (Minn.1996).

2003Furthermore, the court concluded that even if attorney fees were recoverable, 3M would not be entitled to an award of attorney fees here because the district court found that 3M suffered no legally recognizable damages as a result of any breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and, therefore, 3M failed to establish that any damages flowed directly from the alleged breach. *424 3M asserts that we recognized the potential application of the Morrison exception outside of the duty to defend context in American Standard Insurance Co. v. Le, 551 N.W.2d 923 (Minn.1996).

12
Garrick v. Northland Insurance Co.green
minn · 1991 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1996–2002
2 sentences

2002See Garrick, 469 N.W.2d at 714 (“If the change in Minnesota’s historical doctrine is to be made, it seems to us that this argument ought to be directed to the legislature”).

1996Id. at 714 .

12
Abbey v. Farmers Insurance Exchangegreen
minn · 1968 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
2 sentences

2003In Abbey v. Fanners Insurance Exchange, we clarified our holding in Morrison and concluded that, absent statutory authorization, an insured’s ability to recover attorney fees is limited to situations where the insurer has breached its contractual duty to defend. 281 Minn. 113, 119 , 160 N.W.2d 709, 712 (1968) (holding that where the insured was seeking recovery of disability benefits from the insurer, the Morrison exception did not allow the insured to recover attorney fees incurred in his declaratory judgment action against the insurer).

2003In Abbey v. Fanners Insurance Exchange, we clarified our holding in Morrison and concluded that, absent statutory authorization, an insured’s ability to recover attorney fees is limited to situations where the insurer has breached its contractual duty to defend. 281 Minn. 113, 119 , 160 N.W.2d 709, 712 (1968) (holding that where the insured was seeking recovery of disability benefits from the insurer, the Morrison exception did not allow the insured to recover attorney fees incurred in his declaratory judgment action against the insurer).

11
Wood Goods Galore, Inc. v. Reinsurance Ass'n of Minnesotagreen
minnctapp · 1991 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993
2 sentences

1993See Wood Goods Galore v. Reinsurance Ass’n, 478 N.W.2d 205, 210 (Minn.App.1991), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Jan. 30, 1992); Empire Fire & Marine Ins.

1993See Wood Goods Galore v. Reinsurance Ass’n, 478 N.W.2d 205, 210 (Minn.App.1991), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Jan. 30, 1992); Empire Fire & Marine Ins.

11
Lanoue v. Fireman's Fund American Insurance Co.green
minn · 1979 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993
2 sentences

1993Cos., 278 N.W.2d 49, 55 (Minn.1979) (detailing development of the Morrison exception).

1993Cos., 278 N.W.2d 49, 55 (Minn.1979) (detailing development of the Morrison exception).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Morrison v. Swenson green
minn · 1966
2 sentences

2003Morrison , 274 Minn, at 132, 142 N.W.2d at 644 .

2003Morrison , 274 Minn, at 132, 142 N.W.2d at 644 .

12003–2003
Iowa National Mutual Insurance v. Universal Underwriters Insurance green
minn · 1967
2 sentences

1982In Iowa National Mutual Insurance Co. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co., 276 Minn. 362 , 150 N.W.2d 233 (1967), we explained the Morrison rule as follows: [Tjhese authorities * * * are confined to the issue of a breach of contract in an action between the insured and the insurer.

1982In Iowa National Mutual Insurance Co. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co., 276 Minn. 362 , 150 N.W.2d 233 (1967), we explained the Morrison rule as follows: [Tjhese authorities * * * are confined to the issue of a breach of contract in an action between the insured and the insurer.

11982–1982

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MN § Minn. Stat. § 555.08 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 26 (1972–2026) GA 9 (1996–2019) FL 8 (1982–2023) TX 7 (1993–2024) IL 6 (1976–2025) MN 5 (1982–2003) OH 3 (2002–2013) IN 3 (2001–2020) CO 3 (1987–2004) MO 3 (2002–2024) WA 3 (2014–2022) AZ 2 (2002–2022) NY 2 (2010–2014) PA 2 (1990–2021) NV 2 (1980–2014) SD 2 (1998–1999) UT 2 (2001–2012)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check