Legal Opinion

Medyanikov v. Continental Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 29, 2001No. 99C-10979; A108444PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, P. J.

Plaintiffs are insureds under an automobile insurance policy issued by defendant. They appeal from summary judgment dismissing their claims on their policy. ORCP 47 C. The trial court held that there was no coverage under the policy. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

In November 1997, defendant issued an automobile insurance policy to plaintiffs Mikail and Lyubov Medyanikov. The policy listed three covered vehicles and provided $100,000 in liability coverage, $100,000 in uninsured/ underinsured motorist coverage, and $10,000 in personal injury protection coverage. In August 1998, Lyubov…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. HitzOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. North Pacific Insurance v. HamiltonOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Collins v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Wright v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  5. Ater v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Vargas v. Geico Casualty CompanyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API