Legal Opinion

Spearman v. Progressive Classic Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 27, 2016No. 130201718; A155674PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFlynn, J.

This appeal arises from plaintiffs action alleging that his motor vehicle insurance carrier breached its contract to pay uninsured motorist benefits. After prevailing in that action, plaintiff petitioned for an award of attorney fees under ORS 742.061(1), a statute that, in general, requires insurance companies to pay an attorney fee to an insured who prevails in an action to recover insurance benefits. The trial court denied plaintiffs fee petition after concluding that defendant’s response to the insurance claim brought defendant within the scope of ORS 742.061(3), a so-called “safe harbor”…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Vega v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Vsetecka v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Strawn v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  5. Grisby v. Progressive Preferred InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2007

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Robinson v. Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation DistrictCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  2. Spearman v. Progressive Classic Insurance Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Koenig v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. McClain v. Safeco Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  5. Kelley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016

2 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