Legal Opinion

Viking Insurance v. Perotti

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1989No. TC 86-711-CV; CA A47402; SC S36139PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.

Plaintiff Viking Insurance Company issued a “broad form named driver endorsement” (named driver) motor vehicle liability insurance policy to defendant Perotti. Viking brought this declaratory judgment proceeding to determine whether the policy requires Viking to defend Perotti against a claim arising from an accident involving Perotti’s truck in which co-defendant Bauwens was injured. The issue is whether the policy, which purports to insure Perotti only when he is driving, satisfies the requirements of the Financial Responsibility Law (FRL).

The circuit court found that Viking’s named driver…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Whipple v. HowserOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Ferguson v. Birmingham Fire Insurance CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  4. Isenhart v. General Casualty Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Snyder v. NelsonOregon Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Wright v. TurnerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Harlan v. Valley InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  4. United Services Automobile Assn. v. ReillyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. Collins v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

5 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