- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Civil Procedure
- Date Filed: 11-15-2012
- Case #: A144902
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, J. for the Court; Armstrong, P.J.; and Haselton, C.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Friend was injured in an accident while driving a car registered to the president and owner of TWW, Inc. Friend sought underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits from Truck Insurance Exchange (Truck), the insurer of TWW. Truck brought suit seeking a declaration that Friend was not entitled to benefits because TWW did not own the vehicle. Friend counterclaimed for a declaration that he was, in fact, entitled to UIM benefits under the insurance policy based on three arguments. Truck contested each argument, and the trial court granted summary judgment to Friend. Truck appealed, arguing that the court erred in granting summary judgment because there are genuine issues of material fact as to the entitlement of UIM benefits under the policy. The Court of Appeals sought to answer whether the policy provide liability coverage for Friend as a matter of law, and if not, whether ORS 822.040(1)(d) required, as a matter of law, that TWW owned the Mustang, and lastly, whether ORS 742.504 required UIM coverage for Friend as a matter of law. The Court answered all three question in the negative, holding that because factual questions remain unresolved under the theories of which Friend may be entitled to UIM coverage, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Friend. Reversed and remanded.