Legal Opinion

Maine Bonding & Casualty Co. v. Centennial Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 1985No. CA A23760; SC 29943PublishedCited by 66 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeterson, C. J.

The resolution of this case turns upon the answer to this question: When an insured has a layer of “primary” liability insurance and a layer of “excess” liability insurance above the primary, what duty, if any, is owed by the primary liability insurer to the excess liability insurer?

This case involves a classic primary-excess insurance relationship resulting from the purchase by the insured, Great Balls of Fire, Inc., of two separate policies, one providing primary coverage and the other providing excess coverage. Great Balls of Fire purchased a property damage liability policy from defendant…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Michigan Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  3. United States F. & G. Co. v. BramwellOregon Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Continental Casualty Co. v. Reserve InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. Cimarron Insurance v. Travelers InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1960

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

3Cited by66 opinions

  1. Rocor International, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of PittsburghTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Hoffman Construction Co. of Alaska v. Fred S. James & Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Onita Pacific Corp. v. Trustees of BronsonOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  4. American Centennial Insurance Co. v. Canal Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Georgetown Realty, Inc. v. Home InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1992

61 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