Legal Opinion

American Economy Insurance v. Canamore

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 22, 1992No. 90 1 278; CA A68372PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*350EDMONDS, J.

This is a declaratory judgment action. Plaintiff appeals and defendants cross-appeal a judgment regarding defendants’ entitlement to benefits under two insurance policies. We affirm on appeal and on cross-appeal.

Plaintiff issued two insurance policies to defendant Canamore. One was an automobile liability policy that provided a $500,000 liability limit and $50,000 in uninsured/ underinsured (UM/UIM) benefits. The other was a multirisk, extra-liability, umbrella policy with a $1 million liability limit; it did not offer any UM/UIM benefits.

In May, 1988, Canamore was driving a car in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mattiza v. FosterOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  2. White v. Safeco Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. United National Insurance v. DePrizioIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Insurance Co. of State of Pa. v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 2009
  3. Kromer v. Reliance InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  4. MUTUAL OF ENUMCLAW INSURANCE CO. v. KeyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  5. Wright v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2001

12 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