Otterberg v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding an insured was not legally entitled to recover UM benefits because the injuries sustained were covered under the workers' compensation system
• concluding claimant was not legally entitled to recover under either his UM coverage or Iowa Code section 516A.1
• finding a plaintiff was -5- not entitled to recovery when a workers’ compensation statute precluded recovery from the tortfeasors
• noting liberal interpretation of “legally entitled to recover” has in several cases enabled an insured to recover under UM coverage despite inability to recover from the tortfeasor
• noting the party moving for summary judgment has the burden “to show the district court that there was no genuine issue of material fact and that it was entitled to a judgment as a matter of law”
• interpreting “legally entitled to recover” to require “not only that the insured ‘suffered damages caused by the fault of the uninsured motorist,’ but also that the insured’s action against the uninsured motorist was not barred under substantive law”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).