# Board of Regents v. Royal Insurance Co. of America

> Supreme Court of Minnesota · June 17, 1994 · 517 N.W.2d 888

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9574370

## Case

- **Full name:** BOARD OF REGENTS OF the UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, Et Al., Petitioners, Appellants, v. ROYAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Great American Insurance Company, North River Insurance Company, Et Al., Respondents
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Minnesota
- **Decided:** June 17, 1994
- **Citations:** 517 N.W.2d 888; 1994 Minn. LEXIS 436; 1994 WL 264756
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Tomljanovich
- **Judges:** Simonett, Gardebring, Tomljanovich
- **Cited by:** 86 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9574370

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that when a policy does not use language such as “atmosphere” or “watercourse” that only refers to the natural environment, the exclusion encompasses pollution of the air within a building
- holding pollution exclusion that did not limit its terms to atmospheric pollution applied to claim arising from release of asbestos fibers in enclosed environment
- concluding that asbestos unambiguously falls within the exclusion’s language about “other irritants, contaminants, or pollutants”
- concluding that the exclusion provision applied to asbestos even though asbestos was not specifically mentioned in the provision
- concluding that the doctrine was inapplicable where the applicable policy exclusion was “plainly designated as such”

## Opinion text

TOMLJANOVICH, Justice
(dissenting).
I concur with the dissent of Justice Gar-debring.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9574370. Public record. Not legal advice.