Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Sommerholder

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 9, 1983No. 122902; CA A26985PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.

This is an action for declaratory relief under ORS ch 28. The issue is whether plaintiff, as the insurer separately of both vehicles involved in a collision, is entitled to offset personal injury protection (PIP) benefits paid under one policy of insurance against the liability limits available under the other policy. The trial court granted plaintiffs cross-motion for summary judgment and ruled that plaintiff could offset the amount that it paid to defendant Sommerholder, pursuant to the PIP coverage contained in her host-driver’s policy, against the liability limits of the policy insuring…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Perez v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Koberstein v. Sierra Glass Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1983

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kessler v. WeigandtCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
  2. Providence Health Plan v. WinchesterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. Edwards v. Bonneville Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API