Legal Opinion

Hess v. North Pacific Insurance

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 2, 1993No. 60026-1PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrachtenbach, J.

This case concerns the amount payable under the replacement clause of a homeowners insurance policy when the destroyed building is not repaired or replaced and the insured has no intent to repair or replace. This is the first occasion for this court to interpret such a replacement clause.

The facts are stipulated. Defendant, North Pacific Insurance Company, insured a summer cabin of plaintiffs Timothy K and Georgianne H. Hess. The cabin was destroyed by fire. The agreed actual cash value was $20,000. The agreed replacement cost was $43,182.10. The insureds did not replace the cabin, nor do…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. McDonald v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Transcontinental Ins. Co. v. WA. PUBLIC UTILITIES DISTRICTS'UTILITY SYSTEMWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Higgins v. Insurance Company of North AmericaOregon Supreme Court · 1970
  4. Huggins v. Hanover Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1982
  5. James E. Kolls and Life Investors, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Allstate Ins. Co. v. PeasleyWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Allstate Insurance v. PeasleyWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Fraley v. Allstate Insurance CompanyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  4. Conrad Bros. v. John Deere Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2001
  5. Dombrosky v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996

35 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