Legal Opinion

Manz v. Continental American Life Insurance

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 31, 1993No. 9005-02899; CA A68487PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, P. J.

Defendant petitions for review of our decision reversing the summary judgment for it. 117 Or App 78, 843 P2d 480 (1992). We treat the petition as one for reconsideration, ORAP 9.15(1), allow it and adhere to our decision.

In our original opinion, we concluded that Washington substantive law governs this dispute. We also concluded that, under RCWA 48.18.080(1), defendant could not rely on misstatements contained in plaintiffs insurance application, because it did not provide a copy of that application with the certificate of insurance it delivered to plaintiff. Defendant contends that we erred…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Manz v. Continental American Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  3. Lundmark v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Fittro v. Lincoln National Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1988

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Angelini v. DelaneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  2. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC v. SandersOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  3. Karpenski v. American General Life Companies, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2014
  4. Waller v. Auto-Owners InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  5. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC v. SandersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

7 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