Legal Opinion
Winters v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided February 29, 2000No. 23396-7-IIPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorgan, J.
Three questions are presented. (1) After a personal injury protection coverage (PIP) insured has fully recovered his or her damages, does a PIP insurer have a right to reimburse itself for its earlier PIP payments by deducting the amount of such payments from an underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) award, assuming its policy so provides? (2) Does a PIP insurer maintain this right even if it elects to subrogate against the at-fault tortfeasor? (3) Is a PIP insurer’s right conditioned on its paying a pro rata share of costs and fees that the PIP insured reasonably incurred to recover full…
2Cases cited33 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
- Leingang v. PIERCE CO. MED. BUREAU, INC.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
- Leingang v. Pierce County Medical Bureau, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Winters v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2001
- Winters v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Matsyuk v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2012
- Hamm v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
- Chen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.