Farmers Insurance v. Conner
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtWollheim, J.
In Farmers Ins. Co. v. Conner, 217 Or App 83, 174 P3d 1058 (2007), we held that the trial court erred in ruling that ORS 742.544 entitled Farmers Insurance Company (Farmers) to reimbursement of personal injury protection (PIP) benefits. We explained that the parties and the trial court had operated under the belief that ORS 742.544 provided a substantive entitlement to an insurer for the reimbursement of PIP benefits — a proposition that we rejected in Gaucin v. Farmers Ins. Co., 209 Or App 99, 146 P3d 370 (2006). Accordingly, we reversed the trial court judgment and remanded the case to the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Oregon v. GuzekSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Vega v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- Monaco v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1976
- State v. GuzekOregon Supreme Court · 2004
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- McArthur v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2012
- American States Insurance Company v. Joann LaFlamSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2013
- Strawn v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- Koenig v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- Providence Health Plan v. WinchesterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.