Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1964Published

1DissentPerry, J.

In my opinion the majority appear to place some confidence in the result reached by treating the case as one in equity. Whether the case is in equity or at law, the legal principles are the same where the facts are not in dispute and there are no facts from which divergent conclusions can reasonably be drawn. The facts being admitted, the result reached depends upon the principles of law applied.

The majority state that the question in the case is “whether or not the defendant insurer used due diligence to secure” the attendance of the insured at the trial. They then argue that for the insurer…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Schneider v. Autoist Mutual InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Eakle v. HayesWashington Supreme Court · 1936
  4. Curran v. Connecticut Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1941
  5. Bassi v. BassiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925

10 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