Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google
Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web
Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google News
Archive Search
Yahoo!
News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book
Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., Appellant, v. Crum & Forster Insurance Co., Appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. - 618 F.2d 39
Submitted March 13, 1980.Decided April 1, 1980
Bruce E. Sherwood, Wheaton, Minn., for appellant.
Stephen W. Plambeck (on brief), Nilles, Hansen, Selbo, Magill & Davies, Fargo, N. D., for appellee.
Before BRIGHT, ROSS and ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal involves a dispute between two insurance carriers over which one is liable for damages arising from a hunting accident. The accident occurred when a shotgun being held by James Bergerud, Jr., an insured under a farm liability policy issued by Farm Bureau, discharged and injured another member of a deer hunting party. At the time of the accident, the hunting party was in the box of a pickup truck operated by Gary Jacobson, an insured under an automobile liability policy issued by Crum & Forster. The injured hunter filed suit against both Bergerud and Jacobson. A settlement was negotiated, with Farm Bureau paying its policy limits of $25,000, and Crum & Forster contributing $5,000.
Farm Bureau then filed suit for indemnity against Crum & Forster. The facts were stipulated. The District Court,* applying Minnesota law, concluded that the hunting accident had not arisen out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of the motor vehicle insured by Crum & Forster, and judgment was entered dismissing the complaint. This appeal followed.
The judgment is affirmed on the basis of Judge Devitt's well-reasoned opinion. See 8th Cir. Rule 14.
Affirmed.