Fjelstad v. State Farm Insurance, 845 F. Supp. 2d 981

January 8, 2011 auto accident in a Wal-Mart parking lot in Detroit Lakes, Minnesota, involving Plaintiffs Jeri Fjelstad and her sisters Caroline Gerving and Linda Emerson against driver Hanson; Hanson’s liability limits were insufficient to cover all injuries; Plaintiffs sue State Farm for underinsured-motorist and no-fault benefits under Fjelstad’s policy.
Fjelstad’s State Farm policy defines insured to include persons occupying the policyholder’s car, with occupying meaning in, on, entering, or exiting; the dispute centers on whether Gerving and Emerson were occupants at the time of the accident.
At the time of the accident, Fjelstad was loading groceries into the trunk while Gerving and Emerson stood nearby; none of the three had loaded items into the trunk themselves, and all four had been shopping together.
Discovery is complete and the parties cross-moved for summary judgment on Counts I, III, and IV; the material facts are undisputed and the dispositive issue is whether Gerving and Emerson were occupying the vehicle.
The court held they were not occupying the vehicle, granted State Farm’s summary judgment, and dismissed Counts I, III, and IV with prejudice.
Surveillance video indicated the carts blocked the car’s path, and testimony showed Gerving and Emerson would have left after loading was completed; Fjelstad’s affidavit about intent was insufficient to create a genuine issue of fact.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Gerving and Emerson were occupying Fjelstad’s car at the time of the accident	Gerving/Emerson were in the process of loading with Fjelstad; group loading constituted occupying	Occupying requires being in/on entering or exiting; they were not entering the car	No; they were not occupying the vehicle

Allied Mutual Insurance Co. v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co., 552 N.W.2d 561 (Minn. 1996) (occupancy limited to actually entering or getting in; broad proximity not enough)
Short v. Midwest Family Mutual Insurance Co., 602 N.W.2d 914 (Minn.Ct.App. 1999) (holding not occupying where near the vehicle at time of injury)
Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Marvin, 707 N.W.2d 747 (Minn.Ct.App. 2006) (loading the vehicle can constitute occupying if in process of loading)
Himle v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co., 445 N.W.2d 587 (Minn.Ct.App. 1989) (loading/unloading activity does not automatically establish occupancy)
Krupenny v. W. Bend Mut. Ins. Co., 310 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. 1981) (injury during loading into insured truck not occupancy)