Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation, Plaintiff and Appellant v. Acuity, a Mutual Insurance Co. F/k/a…

Summary

The court reversed summary judgment for Acuity because genuine factual disputes existed over whether Acuity reasonably investigated and denied DM & E’s uninsured-motorist claim and whether it acted knowingly or recklessly. The court held that the insurer’s position must be evaluated based on the facts and law available when it denied or litigated the claim, and it provided limits for using post-filing litigation conduct as bad-faith evidence. On the discovery cross-appeal, the court reversed the order compelling discovery from Moore, but upheld it as to Thimsen to the extent consistent with its privilege analysis and remanded for further determinations.