Legal Opinion

York v. Paakkonen

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 30, 2013No. 100811414; A151107PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEgan, J.

Plaintiff brought a personal injury action and obtained a jury award for her economic damages. After judgment was entered, defendant filed a motion for partial satisfaction pursuant to ORS 31.555 in which he sought to reduce the amount of the judgment by the amount that defendant’s insurance carrier had previously provided to plaintiff in personal-injury-protection (PIP) benefits. Plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s order directing the court clerk to enter that partial satisfaction; she contends that the trial court erred under ORS 31.555(2). Plaintiff also seeks attorney fees. For the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mullins v. ROWE ET UXOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Swett v. BradburyOregon Supreme Court · 2003
  3. DeMaris v. WhittierOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Sedillo v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Mitchell v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Koenig v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  2. Lawrence v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API