Legal Opinion

Anderson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 20, 2010No. 050606129; A140254PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLandau, P. J.

Plaintiff appeals a general judgment dismissing for lack of prosecution his claim for personal injury protection (PIP) insurance benefits against defendant. We reverse and remand for reconsideration.

The relevant facts are undisputed and largely procedural in nature. This insurance coverage case stems from an automobile accident that occurred in Nevada in 1998. Plaintiff was injured in the accident, but had PIP coverage through defendant, under a policy issued in Washington. Plaintiff submitted a claim for his injuries, and defendant paid the claim in part and denied it in part. Plaintiff sued…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lutz v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  2. Lambert v. American Dream Homes Corp.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  3. Bock v. Portland Gas & Coke Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Moore v. Ball, Janik & NovackCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. Anderson v. State Farm Mutual Auto InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Lucht v. Mulino Hangar Cafe & Roadhouse, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API