Legal Opinion
Smith v. OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided March 13, 1984No. 5553-1-IIIPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMunson, C.J.
Ohio Casualty Insurance Company (Ohio Casualty) appeals from a summary judgment holding it liable for breach of an insurance contract and for violation of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). It claims: (1) it should not have been collaterally estopped from contesting the findings of fact from prior litigation; (2) the policy does not in fact provide coverage; (3) it should not have been barred from raising additional policy exclusions as a defense to this action; and (4) there was no CPA violation, and even if there was, attorney fees should not have been awarded. We affirm as modified herein.
G…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Salois v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- Phil Schroeder, Inc. v. Royal Globe InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Meissner v. Simpson Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1966
- Insurance Co. of North America v. Insurance Co. of PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1977
- Miller v. INDIANA INSURANCE COMPANIESCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
- Leingang v. PIERCE CO. MED. BUREAU, INC.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
- Leingang v. Pierce County Medical Bureau, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
- Villella v. Public Employees Mutual InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Felice v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.