Professor Steenson, No-Fault Automobile Insurance, Fall 1984

INSTRUCTIONS

1. The test is two hours long. It consists of twenty-eight (28) short answer questions. Time is limited, so your answers to the questions should be concise.

2. If possible, refer to the statutory provisions you feel are controlling.

3. All questions will be weighted equally.

4. Please write on only one side of each bluebook page.

5. Leave at least one space between each answer.

6. Number your bluebooks, e.g. 1 of 3, 2 of 3, 3 of 3.

Note: Unless otherwise stated, all persons and companies mentioned in the problems are Minnesota residents.

 1. A truck owned by the Chemical Company was carrying toxic chemicals. Some of the chemicals leaked from the truck, forming a puddle in the street. A day later, a bus owned by the Transit Commission drove through the puddle, splashing some of the chemical on Able, who was walking along the sidewalk. Assuming that Able does not own a motor vehicle and that both the Chemical Company truck and Transit Commission bus are insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, will Able be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits?

2.Assuming that Able is entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits, what would be the appropriate source for the recovery of those benefits?

3.Able was driving her son and his friend to the playground in the family station wagon.. Both boys were ten years old. The boys were in the back of the station wagon, with the tailgate window open, lighting firecrackers and throwing them out the window. Able had permitted the boys to have the firecrackers earlier in the day. One of the firecrackers thrown by one of the boys exploded in Baker's eye. Baker was a pedestrian on the sidewalk paralleling the street. Able's station wagon was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. In addition, Able had a homeowner's insurance policy that covered her for any sums she was legally obligated to pay third persons. The homeowner=s policy excluded from coverage negligence arising out of the maintenance or use of a motor vehicle. In a declaratory judgment action by the homeowner's insurance company and the automobile insurance company each company seeks to establish that it is not responsible for the injuries sustained by Baker. If you were the Judge, how would you rule on the coverage question as to each insurance company?

4.Able was driving his car down a residential street when a child darted out in front of his car. Able hit the child, injuring her. Baker, the child's father, was in his house at the time, although he was looking out the window and witnessed the accident. As a result he suffered a severe emotional reaction that necessitated medical treatment. Baker owns a motor vehicle that is properly insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Will Baker be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits for the medical expenses he incurred as a result of witnessing the accident?

5.Able owned a motorcycle that was not insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able was riding his motorcycle down the street one day when he hit Baker, a pedestrian, as Baker was crossing the street. Baker owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker=s injuries were serious. Is Able entitled to recover either basic economic loss benefits or uninsured or hit-and-run motorist insurance benefits from his insurance company?

6.Able owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able was involved in an accident in North Dakota while riding in a motor vehicle owned by Baker, a North Dakota resident. Baker's motor vehicle was insured as required by the North Dakota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker carried liability insurance in the amount of $25,000 bodily injury per person with a $50,000 per accident limitation, with $20,000 in property damage coverage. Baker carried uninsured motorist insurance in the same amount. Baker also carried no-fault insurance in the amount of $5,000 per person. Able collected $30,000 in basic economic loss benefits from his own insurance company, and $25,000 from Baker's insurance company in settlement of Able's tort claim against. Baker. Able now seeks to recover uninsured motorist insurance benefits from his insurance company. Is he entitled to recover those benefits?

7.Able owned a motor vehicle that was not insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act . Able was driving his motor vehicle one day when the vehicle stalled on the highway. Able pulled his vehicle over to the shoulder of the highway, parked it, and got out to walk to the nearest gas station. The station was 300 feet away. When Able was about 50 feet away from his vehicle he was hit by a motor vehicle driven by Baker. Baker's vehicle was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits under Baker's no-fault coverage?

8.Able owned a motor vehicle that was not insured as required by the No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker, Able's spouse, was unaware that Able had failed to insure the vehicle, because Able took care of the family finances. Able and Baker were injured in an accident while in Able's motor vehicle. Will either Able or Baker be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits under the Assigned Claims Plan?

9. Able and Baker had lived together for several years but were not married. Able owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker also owned a motor vehicle that was not insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker was hit by a motor vehicle owned and driven by Charlie, who did not insure his vehicle as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Is Baker entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits under Able's insurance coverage?

10.Able and Baker, husband and wife, owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able was injured while driving the vehicle. Able's injuries were serious. He was out of work for six months as a result of the accident. Prior to the accident Able and Baker shared the household tasks equally, including caring for their two children. Able and Baker both held full-time jobs. During the time Able was disabled Baker performed all the household tasks ordinarily performed by Able. Is Able entitled to recover replacement services loss benefits for the services performed by Baker?

11. Able and Baker were married. They jointly owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able died as a result of injuries sustained in an accident while driving their vehicle. Baker made a claim for survivors' economic loss benefits against their insurance company. Although the insurer acknowledged responsibility to pay the benefits it argued that the benefits should be reduced by an amount that will reflect the fact that the benefits are not taxable, and by an amount that will reflect the expenses saved by reason of Able's death. Are the insurance company's arguments correct?

12. Able owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. While driving his own vehicle, Able was involved in an accident with Baker, who was driving his own motor vehicle, which was also insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able received $5,000 in medical expense benefits from his own insurance company and then commenced suit against Baker. In the suit the jury found that Baker was negligent, that Able sustained $5,000 in past medical empenses and would sustain $10,000 in future medical expense benefits. The jury also awarded Able $10,000 in damages for past pain and suffering and $10,000 in future pain and suffering. What impact does the award of $10,000 in future medical expenses have on Able's right to recover medical expense benefits from his insurer to cover medical expenses incurred after trial? What impact will the award of damages for future pain and suffering have on his right to recover such benefits?

13.Able owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile insurance Act. While driving his own vehicle Able was involved in an accident with Baker, who was driving his own motor vehicle, which was also insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. As a result of the accident Able was out of work for eight weeks. His gross wage was $500 per week. He received disability and income loss benefits in the amount of $200 per week for eight weeks from his insurance company. Able then brought suit against Baker. Able alleged in his complaint that he sustained a permanent disfigurement as a result of the accident. The disfigurement consisted cf a two-inch, pencil-thin scar on the shin of Able's right leg. Baker moved for summary judgment on the basis that Able did not meet the tort threshold as a matter of law. Should the motion be granted?

14.Assume the same facts as in the above problem, but assume that Able is unable to meet either the permanent disfigurement threshold or any other tort threshold. Is Able entitled to recover anything in his negligence action against Baker? If so, what?

15.Able was involved in a motor vehicle accident with Baker. Able and Baker owned the vehicles they were driving at the time of the accident. Both vehicles were insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker had been drinking heavily just before the accident. He was served intoxicating liquor by the Club Bar, in violation of the Civil Damage Act. As a result of the injuries Able sustained in the accident, Able was out of work for eight weeks. His gross wage was $500 per week. His insurer paid him $200 per week 14 in disability and income loss benefits, for eight weeks. In a lawsuit againtat the Club Bar, Able is unable to prove any of the tort thresholds. Is Able entitled to recover any damages from the C Bar. If so, what damages?

16.Able owned his own motor vehicle, which was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault. Automobile Insurance Act. Able was involved in an accident while driving his vehicle. As a result of the accident Able underwent medical treatment for a back injury sustained in the accident. The medical expenses incurred because of the treatment totaled $5,000. Able was then discharged from treatment by her doctor. Able returned to work but was bothered by nagging pain from the back injury. Fourteen months after she was discharged from treatment by her doctor Able went back for further physical therapy necessitated by the back injury. Is Able entitled to recover medical expense benefits from her insurer for the expenses incurred because of the physical therapy?

17.Able, an adult, resided with her mother and father. Able owned a motor vehicle that was not insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able's parent's also owned a motor vehicle that was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Insurance Act. Able was involved in an accident while driving her parents' motor vehicle. Able made a claim for basic economic loss benefits against her parents insurance company. However, the company denied the claim based on a clause in its policy which excluded coverage for injuries sustained by any resident relative who owns his or her own motor vehicle. Is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits under her parents= insurance coverage, notwithstanding the exclusionary clause?

18.Able owned the Transport Company. He owned a single truck with attached trailer that was used in the business. The truck was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Act. Able was in the process of unloading lumber in December 1984 when he slipped and fell on a patch of ice in the trailer attached to the truck. Water had accumulated in the trailer from snow tracked into the trailer by Able on a previous stop. The water then froze, creating the ice patch. Able was injure when he fell. Does his injury from the fall arise out of the use of a motor vehicle for purposes of a claim by Able for basic economic loss benefits?

19.Able owned a motor vehicle that was properly insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able sold the motor vehicle to Baker for cash. However, Able failed to transfer the title to Baker. One week later, Baker was involved in an accident while driving the motor vehicle he had just bought from Able. Baker did not obtain the insurance required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Charlie, a passenger in Baker's car, was injured in the accident. Charlie made a claim for basic economic loss benefits against Able's insurance company. Is Charlie entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits against Able's insurance company?

20.Able was injured in an accident while driving his own motor vehicle, which was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. As a result of the injury, which was not work-related, Able was out of work for four weeks. His gross wage at his regular employment was $500 per week. Able did obtain substitute employment, however. During the four-week period in which he was unable to work at his regular job he worked part-time at a job which paid him $200 per week. Based upon the above facts, is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits to cover his wage loss? If so, in what amount?

21.Able was injured in an accident while driving a dump truck in the course and scope of his employment with the Construction Company. The dump truck was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able was out of work for twelve weeks. He received workers' compensation temporary total disability benefits during that time period in the amount of $329 per week. (Workers' compensation pays a total of 66 2/3ds of the gross wage loss up to $329 per week). Is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits for the wage loss that is not compensated by workers' compensation? If so, in what amount?

22.Able, a resident of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, owned 2 motor vehicles. The vehicles were insured with Allstate Insurance Company. Allstate is licensed to do business in Minnesota. Wisconsin is not a no-fault jurisdiction. Able drove into Minnesota with a friend of his. While in Minnesota they were involved in a motor vehicle accident in Able's friend's car. Able's medical expenses exceeded $40,000. Will Able be entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits from his insurance company to cover his medical expenses? In what amount?

23.Able, a resident of Arizona, a non-no-fault jurisdiction, carried liability insurance as required by Arizona law, in the amount of $10,000 bodily injury coverage per person, with a $20,000 per occurrence limitation, and $5,000 in property damage coverage. Able carried his insurance with Arizona Only, a company licensed to do business only in Arizona, and that wrote insurance only in Arizona. Able was driving his car in Minnesota when he was involved in an accident with a vehicle owned and driven by Baker, a resident of Minnesota. Able sustained serious injuries in the accident. Is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits from Arizona Only?

24.Assume the same facts as above, but assume that Arizona Only refuses to pay. Is Able entitled to recover basic economic loss benefits from any other source?

25.Assume the same facts as in problem # 23, but also assume the following additional facts: Baker's motor vehicle was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Baker also sustained serious injuries in the accident. The accident was entirely due to Able's negligence. Able's insurance policy contained a clause stating that Able's liability insurance coverage would convert to the insurance coverage required by the law of the state where the accident occurred. Baker exhausted his basic economic loss benefits and now seeks to recover uninsured motorist insurance benefits from his insurance company. Is he entitled to recover those benefits?

26.Able, a Minnesota resident, owned a motor vehicle insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able was involved in an accident with another vehicle in Wisconsin. The Wisconsin vehicle was insured as required by Wisconsin law. It carried liability insurance in the amount of $15,000 bodily injury per person, with a $30,000 per occurrence limitation, and $10,000 in property damage coverage. The accident was due entirely to the negligence of the Wisconsin driver. Able's injuries were extremely serious. He collected the maximum amount of basic economic loss benefits from his insurance company. He now seeks to recover uninsured motorist insurance benefits from his insurance company. Is he entitled to recover those benefits?

27.In January of 1980 Able purchased a car. He insured the car with Allstate Insurance Company. Able asked the Allstate agent for only the minimum coverages required by Minnesota law. The agent wrote only the minimum coverages required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. The policy was to be renewed annually. The agent made no attempt to offer Able the optional coverages such as underinsured motorist insurance. In February, of 1981, after Able's policy had been renewed by Allstate, Able was involved in an accident with a motor vehicle owned and driven by Baker. Baker's motor vehicle was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Able sustained serious injuries in the accident. He exhausted his basic economic loss benefits, and then sued Baker. He recovered a judgment of $100,000 from Baker. Baker=s insurer paid the policy limits of $25,000 to Able. Able now seeks to recover underinsured motorist insurance benefits from his own insurance company. Is he entitled to recover these benefits?

28.Able was injured in a motor vehicle accident while driving his own motor vehicle. Her vehicle was insured as required by the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Although Able was not injured in the course and scope of his employment, his employer voluntarily decided to continue Able's wages of $300 per week during the period of her disability. Is Able entitled to recover disability and income loss benefits for the wages that would have been lost except for the voluntary wage continuation by the employer?