Grinnell Mut. Reins. Co. v. Farm & City Ins. Co. v. Leikas
Company, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Farm & City Insurance Company, Intervenor and Appellee
and
Casey Leikas, Vernon Leikas,
Gail Leikas, Thomas Zander,
individually, and as representative
of all heirs-at-law of June Zander,
deceased, and Thomas Zander, as
personal representative of the
Estate of June Zander (collectively
referred to as Zanders), Defendants and Appellants
Judge Norman J. Backes
| Appellant: | Johnson, Ramstad & Mottinger, PLLP | |
| Appellant: | David R. Bossart Law Firm, PC | |
| Appellant: | #Pearson Christensen Cahill & Clapp, PLLP | |
| Appellee: | Charles Alan Stock | |
| Appellee: | Nilles, Ilvedson, Plambeck & Selbo, Ltd. | |
| Appellant: | Dickson Law Office |
I.Whether the trial court erred in granting Plaintiff and Intervenor summary judgments under an automobile insurance policy exclusion that is contrary to North Dakota financial responsibility law.
II.Whether the trial court erred in granting Plaintiff and Intervenor summary judgments because the undisputed evidence shows that Casey Leikas had a reasonable belief that he was entitled to use the car and Defendants were entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
III.Whether the trial court erred in making findings on disputed facts without an evidentiary hearing.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I Whether Exclusion A.8 to Farm & City's Automobile Policy Violates N.D.C.C. 39-16.1-11(2)(b)?
II. Whether The Trial Court Properly Granted Summary Judgment Because There was Insufficient Evidence to Raise a Genuine Issue of Material Fact that Casey Leikas had a Reasonable Belief that He was Entitled to Use the 1995 Oldsmobile on December 6, 1997?
III. Whether The Trial Court Properly Granted Summary Judgment Without an Evidentiary Hearing?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Appellee Grinnell Mutual does not agree to the manner in which Appellants have phrased the issues on appeal, and therefore provide the following Statement of the Issues.
1.Whether Grinnell Mutual's policy exclusion is contrary to North Dakota financial responsibility laws.
2 Whether summary judgment was appropriately granted because no genuine issues of material fact exist concerning whether Casey Leikas had permission to use the 1995 Oldsmobile.
3.Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment without an evidentiary hearing.
Add Docket 990394 RSS