Minn. Stat. § 65A.08, subdiv. 2(a) (emphasis added); seeWhite v. N.H. Ins. Co. , 390 N.W.2d 313, 314 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986) (referring to Minn. Stat. § 65A.08, subdiv. 2 as the "valued policy statute").

Fire insurance in Minnesota is regulated primarily by statute. White v. N.H. Ins. Co., 390 N.W.2d 313, 314 (Minn.App.1986), review denied (Minn. Aug. 27, 1986); seeMinn.Stat.

Fire insurance in Minnesota is regulated primarily by statute. White v. N.H. Ins. Co., 390 N.W.2d 313, 314 (Minn. App. 1986), review denied (Minn. Aug. 27, 1986); see Minn. Stat. §§ 65A.01-.15 (2010).

See, e.g., Jones v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 740 S.W.2d 708 (Mo.Ct.App. 1987) (under similar statute, Missouri court refused to allow recovery of face amount of policy before building was completed where amount insured depended on percentage of completion); American General Fire and Cas. Co. v. Buford, 716 S.W.2d 86 (Tex.Ct.App. — 1986) (builders risk policy where amount of coverage was based on completion cost and not agreed-upon value was not a valued policy); Century Corp. v. Phoenix of Hartford, 482 P.2d 1020 (Mont. 1971) (policy was intended only to cover remodeling work done on building and not a fixed value; valued policy law not applicable); White v. New Hampshire Ins. Co., 390 N.W.2d 313 (Minn.Ct.App. 1986) (policy covering actual value of building at time of destruction was a builders risk policy and insured not entitled to estimated limit of loss under valued policy law). Griffin Construction relies on two Arkansas cases to support its argument that the policy involved is a valued policy.

Our interpretation is also supported by our decision in White v. New Hampshire Insurance Co., which acknowledged that section 65A.08, the section at issue in this case, substantively parallels the "total loss on buildings" language in section 65A.01. 390 N.W.2d 313 (Minn.App. 1986), rev. denied (Minn. Aug. 27, 1986). There, this court explained: