Legal Opinion

Bergmann v. Hutton

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 2, 2004No. CC 00-3304-L-2; CA A115380; SC S50395PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*599GILLETTE, J.

In this automobile insurance case, the issue is whether an insurer is entitled to offset the amount that an injured insured received in workers’ compensation benefits against the amount that the insurer otherwise would have been obligated to pay to the insured under the insured’s underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in a policy issued by the defendant insurer. The issue arose when plaintiff1 submitted a claim under the UIM coverage. Defendant responded that the policy entitled it to offset the workers’ compensation payments that plaintiff had received and that, in the offset,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Oregon Steel Mills, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, LLPOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  3. California Casualty Indemnity Exchange v. MaritzenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  4. Grijalva v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaOregon Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Pitchford v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Eads v. BormanOregon Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Southern-Owners Insurance Co. v. Easdon Rhodes & Associates LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CoeAppellate Court of Illinois · 2006
  4. Dewsnup v. Farmers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Mid-Century Insurance v. PerkinsOregon Supreme Court · 2008

23 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