Legal Opinion

Waller v. Auto-Owners Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 6, 2001No. 99-CV-0164-AB; A109303PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLinder, J.

Plaintiff initiated this breach of contract action against defendant Auto-Owners, her parents’ automobile insurance carrier, to recover underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, concluding as a matter of law that, because she was a resident of Oregon at the time of the accident, plaintiff was not covered under her parents’ Florida insurance policies. Plaintiff appeals. Because we conclude that a genuine issue of material fact exists, see ORCP 47 C, we reverse and remand.

The following background facts, which are not disputed, gave…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Jones v. General Motors Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Davis v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Angelini v. DelaneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  4. Manz v. Continental American Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. First Far West Transportation, Inc. v. Carolina Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Spirit Partners, LP v. Stoel Rives LLPCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  2. Giuliano v. Anchorage Advisors, LLCDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2014
  3. Bresee Homes, Inc. v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. Alterra Am. Ins. Co. v. James W. Fowler Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 2018
  5. Powell v. System Transport Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2015

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

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

Powered by the Exa API