Matsyuk v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
¶1 These consolidated cases invite us to clarify the pro rata fee sharing rule announced in Mahler v. Szucs, 135 Wn.2d 398, 957 P.2d 632, 966 P.2d 305 (1998), and elaborated upon in Winters v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 144 Wn.2d 869, 31 P.3d 1164 (2001), and Hamm v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 151 Wn.2d 303, 88 P.3d 395 (2004). This equitable rule is based upon the common fund exception to the well-known “American rule” on attorney fees, and it requires a personal injury protection (PIP) insurer to share pro rata in the attorney fees incurred by an injured…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. v. Centennial Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1991
- Mahler v. SzucsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Mahler v. SzucsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Hayseeds, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Cas.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1986
- Dayton v. Farmers Insurance GroupWashington Supreme Court · 1994
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- SentinelC3, Inc. v. HuntWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Maytown Sand & Gravel, LLC v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- Heide v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2017
- TJ Landco, LLC v. Harley C. Douglass, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- In re the Guardianship of DeckerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.