Legal Opinion

Bonds v. Farmers Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 14, 2010No. CC 051213375; CA A134011; SC S057422PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*154WALTERS, J.

In this case, we decide that, to “formally institute arbitration,” and thereby satisfy the timelines set forth in ORS 742.504(12)(a)(B) and maintain a claim for under-insured motorist (UIM) benefits, an insured or an insurer must expressly communicate to the other party that the initiating party is beginning the process of arbitrating a dispute. We further decide that two letters written by defendant to plaintiff in this case did not meet that standard and that plaintiffs claim for UIM benefits is therefore time-barred.

On July 2, 2003, plaintiff was injured in an automobile…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Vega v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Molodyh v. Truck Insurance ExchangeOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Carrier v. HicksOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Liles v. Damon Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2008

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Zimmerman v. Allstate Property & Casualty InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Paton v. American Family Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  3. Luka v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation DistrictCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. Bonds v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Bonds v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2010

3 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