- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Fiduciary Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
-
June 6, 2023Super Lawyers Names Five Attorneys to “Southern California Rising Stars” List
-
June 1, 2023Chambers USA Recognizes Five Robins Kaplan Practice Groups and 17 Lawyers in 2023 Guide
-
May 2023Robins Kaplan LLP Celebrates 85 Years
-
June 9, 2023LGBTQ Legal Services: Transgender Name Change Clinic
-
June 13, 20232023 Probate and Trust Law Section Conference
-
June 14, 2023Leading Through Uncertainty
-
May 2023Raoul Shah: Keeping Humanity and Compassion Close
-
May 18, 2023NFT Trademark Defense Comes Down To Licensing Terms
-
April 20, 2023Drafting Subsequent Agreements to Avoid Arbitrability Litigation
-
September 16, 2022Uber Company Systems Compromised by Widespread Cyber Hack
-
September 15, 2022US Averts Rail Workers Strike With Last-Minute Tentative Deal
-
September 14, 2022Hotter-Than-Expected August Inflation Prompts Massive Wall Street Selloff
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
Why the Auto-Owners v. Second Chance Ruling Is Unique
In Auto‐Owners Insurance Co. v. Second Chance Investments LLC, 827 N.W.2d 766 (Minn. 2013), the Minnesota Supreme Court addressed the question of whether an appraisal panel can determine whether an insured sustained a total loss.
April 24, 2013
Law360, New York (April 24, 2013, 1:18 PM ET) ‐‐ Twenty states, including Minnesota, have valued policy statutes. In those states, the insurer must pay the insured property owner the full face value of the policy in the event of a total loss. In Auto‐Owners Insurance Co. v. Second Chance Investments LLC, 827 N.W.2d 766 (Minn. 2013), the Minnesota Supreme Court addressed the question of whether an appraisal panel can determine whether an insured sustained a total loss.
The court answered that question in the negative, finding that the appraisal provision in Minnesota’s statutory standard fire insurance policy does not provide parties the right to have an appraisal panel decide whether a claim involves a total loss.
All Content © 2003‐2013, Portfolio Media, Inc.
The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.
Related Professionals
Related Publications
Damned if You Don’t
In Times of Crisis:
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.