No notice of cancellation or reduction in the limits of liability of coverage of an automobile insurance policy under section 65B.15 shall be effective unless the specific underwriting or other reason or reasons for such cancellation or reduction in the limits of liability of coverage are stated in such notice and the notice is mailed or delivered by the insurer so as to provide the named insured with at least 30 days' notice prior to the effective date of cancellation; provided, however, that when nonpayment of premium is the reason for cancellation or when the company is exercising its right to cancel insurance which has been in effect for less than 60 days at least ten days' notice of cancellation, and the reasons for the cancellation, shall be given. Information regarding moving traffic violations or motor vehicle accidents must be specifically requested on the application in order for a company to use those incidents to exercise its right to cancel within the first 59 days of coverage. When nonpayment of premiums is the reason for cancellation, the reason must be given to the insured with the notice of cancellation; and if the company is exercising its right to cancel within the first 59 days of coverage and notice is given with less than ten days remaining in the 59-day period, the coverage must be extended, to expire ten days after notice was mailed.
Notes of Decisions
Jorgensen v. Knutson, 662 N.W.2d 893 (Minn. 2003).
· cites it 84× “On a motion for summary judgment, the district court ruled in favor of the Jorgensens on the ground that Milbank had not given the ten-days' cancellation notice required by Minn.Stat. § 65B.16 (2000). Following a bench trial, the court found the Miller-Shugart settlement to be…”
Ophus v. Tri-State Ins. Co. of Minnesota, 392 N.W.2d 653 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 14× “The trial court concluded that there was coverage for Kurt Ophus under Tri-State’s policy of insurance because Tri-State had failed to effectively cancel the first policy by not sending notice to Roger Ophus thirty days in advance of the date of termination as required by…”
Dairyland Ins. Co. v. Neuman, 338 N.W.2d 37 (Minn. 1983).
· cites it 7× “Minn.Stat. § 65B.16. 1. The question before us is whether the renewal statute or the cancellation statutes govern the termination of short-term policies.”
Caduff v. Universal Underwriters Ins. Co., 381 N.W.2d 9 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 4× “Was the policy properly reformed to include basic economic loss benefits? ANALYSIS I Minn.Stat. § 65B.16 (1984) provides: No notice of cancellation * * * of an automobile insurance policy * * * shall be effective unless the specific * * * reason or reasons for such cancellation…”
Jorgensen v. Knutson, 643 N.W.2d 615 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 65B.16 (2000). Minn.Stat. § 645.”
Evans v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co., 257 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. 1977).
· cites it 2× “1, and was the reason listed in the cancellation notice, which provided more than 10 days’ notice of cancellation as required by § 65B.16, no ground appears by which the commissioner could find the cancellation “arbitrary, capricious or otherwise in violation of this provision.”
Martinson v. Iowa Kemper Ins. Co., 390 N.W.2d 447 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 10× “Did the trial court err by concluding that the ten day notice of cancellation provision under Minn.Stat. § 65B.16 (1984) applied to the termination of Martinson’s insurance policy? 3.”
Pierce v. MSI Ins. Co., 406 N.W.2d 328 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Nonpayment of premium; Minn.Stat. § 65B.16 provides: When nonpayment of premiums is the reason for cancellation, the reason must be given to the insured with the notice of cancellation; and if the company is exercising its right to cancel within the first 59 days of coverage and…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.