Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 70A.11 (2026)

Disapproval Of Rates

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Order after hearing.

If the commissioner finds after a contested case proceeding under chapter 14 that a rate is not in compliance with section 70A.04, the commissioner shall order that its use is to be discontinued and shall order the excess premium plus interest at the rate specified in section 549.09 to be refunded to the policyholder. The amount of the refund, plus interest, must be computed from the commencement date of the contested case hearing on the rate. Interest must be computed as simple interest per annum.

Subd. 2.Timing of order.

The order under subdivision 1 shall be issued within 60 days after the close of the hearing or within such reasonable time extension as the commissioner may fix.

Subd. 3.Approval of substituted rate.

No rate replacing a disapproved rate may be used until it has been filed with the commissioner and not disapproved within 60 days thereafter, except that the rate disapproved under subdivision 1, with the consent of the commissioner, or the last previous rate in effect for the insurer may be used for a period of not more than three months pending the approval of a substituted rate. The commissioner's order may include provision for a premium adjustment in a rate charged pending approval of a substituted rate.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2005–2012 · leading case: Schermer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 721 N.W.2d 307 (Minn. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Schermer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 721 N.W.2d 307 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 16× “[4] We conclude that the legislative intent that the filed rate doctrine should apply to insurance rates is reflected in Minn.Stat. § 70A.11 (2004). That section addresses the refund authority of the DOC and restricts that authority to only order refunds that are calculated from…”

Palmer v. Illinois Farmers Ins., 666 F.3d 1081 (8th Cir. 2012). “The insured can then appeal the denial of her request to the Commissioner of Commerce who must hold a hearing and affirm or reverse the insurer’s action.”

Schermer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 702 N.W.2d 898 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 70A.11, subd. 1 (2004). Further, if the DOC determines that an insurer has charged illegal or improper rates, engaged in any fraudulent or misleading conduct during the filing process, or engaged in any other unfair *904 trade practice, the commissioner may seek…”

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.