of assuring the finality of judgments. Furthermore, there is merit in respondent’s argument that absent the ten-day limitation set forth in Section 548.36 — a deadline notably missing in Section 65B.51, subd. 1 — proceedings seeking recovery of collateral source benefits could be brought months and even years after judgments have been entered and damage awards have been depleted or exhausted by those having received them. Our analysis of the reconcilability of Minn.Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 1, and Minn. Stat. § 548.36 would not be complete without examining the caselaw that informs our decision here. In Wertish, 555 N.W.2d at 26, this court reversed the district court and determined that the collateral source statute applied to motions brought pursuant to the no-fault statute. Id. at 28-29 (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court reversed this court in a
holding that even if the doctrine applies to option contracts no conversion would take place until the option were exercised by the party having the right of election holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease the lessee was required to exercise the option on or before the last day of the lease holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease but providing no more specific time requirement the lessee had a reasonable time to exercise the option within the term of the lease holding language of the collateral source statute indicates defendant has option of filing motion for collateral source determination and if defendant chooses to exercise option he is required to do so within ten days noting that any other construction would make the 10day period meaningless holding that the presumption of a yeartoyear holdover tenancy applies even if the original lease contained a renewal option if the tenant fails to affirmatively exercise the option