Legal Opinion · Dissent

Transportation Equipment Rentals, Inc. v. Oregon Automobile Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1970Published

1DissentO’Connell, C. J.

Mr. Martin, plaintiff’s agent, testified that when he called the Van Doren Agency, which was the agent for defendant Oregon Automobile Insurance Company, he “explained that Eoss and Millsap wanted the equipment immediately and that he wanted a *303verbal binder on it, and also TEE to be named as additional insured.” When plaintiff received a copy of tbe binder it immediately replied by letter, stating that “We need a 10-day cancellation clause and also an additional insured clause naming Transportation Equipment Rentals, Inc. as additional insured to attach to this binder.” This letter was mailed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Coburn v. Fireman's Fund Insurance CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Parsons Corp.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1969
  3. Allcorn v. Commonwealth Mutual Fire InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Richelieu & Ontario Navigation Co. v. Thames & Mersey Marine InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1885

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API