Legal Opinion

Rossier v. Union Automobile Insurance

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 12, 1930PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBelt, J.

This action is based on an insurance policy covering damage to automobile, arising out of accidental collision. It is conceded that the policy was in effect at the time in question and that the automobile of the plaintiff was damaged as a result of a collision. The principal questions presented on appeal are: (1) Has the plaintiff a right to maintain this action in view of the fact that it was commenced prior to the repair of the automobile? (2) What is the measure of damages ? Belative to the first question, the insurance company contends that, under the policy, it has the right or option to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. CorbettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
  2. Stoops v. First American Fire InsuranceTennessee Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Federal Insurance v. HiterCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  4. Standard Accident Ins. Co. of Detroit v. RichmondCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927
  5. Haussler v. Indemnity Co. of AmericaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1923

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Illinois Central Railroad v. Franklin CountyIllinois Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Carlton v. Trinity Universal Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2000
  3. George B. Wallace Co. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Clark Motor Co. v. United Pacific InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Dunmire Motor Co. v. Oregon Mutual Fire InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1941

17 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