Legal Opinion

Bauder v. Farmers Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 16, 1986No. TC A8403-01592; CA A34683; SC S32352PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillette, J.

This is another in a series of cases in which this court has been called upon to discern and declare the extent of statutorily mandated personal injury protection (PIP) insurance coverage in an automobile liability policy. The present case involves interaction between PIP coverage and separately mandated uninsured motorist (UM) coverage. The issue presented is: When the damages that an insured is entitled to recover from his insurer because of injuries caused by an uninsured motorist exceed the aggregate of his UM and PIP coverage, should the PIP payments be subtracted from the amount due…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lane County v. R. A. Heintz Construction Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Peterson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Monaco v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Kessler v. WeigandtOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  5. American Motorists Insurance Co. v. ThompsonOregon Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Younger v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Farmers Insurance v. ConnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. Tyree v. TyreeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. Shisler v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
  5. Yokum v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

6 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