New Oregon Court Decision Opens Door for Additional Insurance Coverage for Crash Victims
If you are injured by a driver who does not carry enough insurance to fully compensate you for all of your injuries, medical bills, and pain and suffering, your own Oregon underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage can be critical. A recent Oregon Court of Appeals decision provides important protections for Oregon drivers seeking to access the coverage they paid for.
In Rogers v. Farmers Insurance Company of Oregon, the court held that an insurance company could not deny UIM benefits under a second policy based on a policy exclusion that was less favorable than Oregon law allows.
What Happened in the Rogers Case?
The plaintiff owned two vehicles, a Mazda and a Lexus, each insured under separate Oregon insurance policies issued by Farmers Insurance. Both policies provided $100,000 in underinsured motorist coverage.
While driving her Mazda, the plaintiff was seriously injured when another driver caused a collision. The at-fault driver carried only $15,000 in liability insurance, far less than the plaintiff's damages, which allegedly exceeded $750,000.
After receiving the at-fault driver's policy limits and the $100,000 UIM limits available under the Mazda policy, the plaintiff sought additional UIM benefits under her Lexus policy. Farmers denied the claim, relying on a policy provision excluding coverage when the insured is injured while occupying a vehicle she owns that is not insured under the policy from which coverage is sought.
The plaintiff sued her own insurance Company, Farmers, arguing that the exclusion violated Oregon's UIM statutes.
What Did the Court Decide?
The Oregon Court of Appeals agreed with the injured plaintiff.
The court explained that Oregon's uninsured and underinsured motorist statutes establish minimum coverage requirements that insurance companies must provide. Policy provisions that offer less protection than Oregon law requires are unenforceable.
The key question was whether the plaintiff's Mazda qualified as an "insured vehicle" under Oregon's statutory UIM framework. Farmers argued that because the Mazda was not listed on the Lexus policy, the exclusion applied.
The court rejected that argument. It concluded that the Mazda was an insured vehicle under Oregon law and that Farmers' exclusion improperly restricted coverage beyond what the statute permits.
As a result, the court held that Farmers could not rely on the exclusion to deny benefits under the Lexus policy.
Why This Decision Matters to Oregonians:
The Rogers decision reinforces an important principle of Oregon insurance law: underinsured motorist coverage generally follows the person, not the vehicle.
In practical terms, that means an injured person may have access to multiple sources of UIM coverage depending on the circumstances and policy language involved. This is often referred to as “stacking” policies. Insurance companies cannot limit those rights through their insurance policy provisions that provide less protection than Oregon's statutory model policy.
The court also recognized the unfair result that would follow from Farmers' interpretation. Under the insurer's view, the plaintiff could potentially recover under multiple policies if she had been injured while walking, biking, or riding in someone else's vehicle—but not while driving her own insured vehicle. The court found no indication that the legislature intended such a result.
What This Means for Oregon Injury Victims
Many injured Oregon drivers assume that once an insurance company pays the limits of one policy, no additional compensation is available. That is not always the case, and Insurance Companies are not eager to inform you about other policies that may provide coverage.
In catastrophic injury cases, wrongful death cases, and other motor vehicle crash cases, there may be multiple sources of insurance coverage beyond the at-fault driver's policy, including uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage, umbrella policies, employer policies, and coverage available through household family members. Recent Oregon appellate decisions continue to emphasize that insurers cannot rely on policy provisions that provide less protection than Oregon law requires.
Identifying every available source of insurance coverage often requires a detailed investigation of the accident, the vehicles involved, policy language, ownership records, and family relationships. An experienced Oregon personal injury attorney can analyze all potentially applicable policies, challenge improper denials of coverage, and pursue every available avenue of recovery. At Ross Law, attorney Jeremiah Ross routinely investigates additional insurance coverage and pursues claims under all applicable policies to help maximize compensation for individuals and families affected by catastrophic injuries and wrongful death.
Contact Ross Law
At Ross Law, we help Oregon injury victims evaluate all available sources of insurance coverage after a serious accident. If an insurance company has denied your claim or you have questions about uninsured or underinsured motorist benefits, our team can help you understand your rights and pursue the compensation available under Oregon law.
Contact Ross Law today at 503.224.1658 for a consultation to discuss your case and your insurance coverage options. Please do not rely on this post as legal advice or to cite in any legal briefs. Insurance issues are complicated and difficult to navigate, and the law often changes. Please consult with an Oregon Personal Injury Lawyer if you have questions about insurance and underinsured motorist policies, rather than relying on this post. This post may be considered attorney advertising.