Legal Opinion

Windsor Insurance v. Judd

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 12, 1994No. 92-7-183; CA A78403PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.

Defendants appeal a summary judgment in favor of plaintiff Windsor Insurance Company, which declared that plaintiff is not obligated to provide defendants underinsurance coverage. We affirm.

The facts are undisputed. Defendants’ son, Gordon Judd, was killed in a two-car collision while riding in a vehicle driven by Jeffrey Manning. Manning was insured under a Safeco single limit automobile insurance policy that provided liability coverage in the amount of $60,000. As a result of the accident, multiple claims were made against Manning’s insurance. Judd was insured under his parents’ policy with…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hoffman Construction Co. of Alaska v. Fred S. James & Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Gaston v. ParsonsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Allstate Insurance v. HagerNew York Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Allstate Insurance v. HagerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Windsor Insurance v. JuddOregon Supreme Court · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API