Practice Area
First Third Partysiu
From the desk of Josh Hayward: Washington’s Made Whole Doctrine establishes that a person with insurance must be fully reimbursed for their losses, or “made whole,” before the person’s insurance company can take from any third-party recovery proceeds to recoup what they paid out on a claim. This case addresses the question, really how much is required to be “made…
Read more »
Wednesday December 9, 2020 By: Josh Hayward
Claims Alleged: Appeal from Summary Judgment Dismissal of Adverse Possession and Prescriptive Easement Claims The Overview: Smith Freed Eberhard partner, Ashley Nagrodski, and associate, Jessica Kamish, achieved a compelling win for their clients in the Washington Court of Appeals when the court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the claims against their clients. Ashley and Jessica were assigned the case during the late stages of…
Read more »
Tuesday December 1, 2020 By: Firm Authorship
From the desk of Jeff Eberhard: Hear Ye Hear Ye! Read all about it. The Oregon Supreme Court has issued a landmark opinion addressing once and for all a topic of heated debate between Oregon’s plaintiff and defense bars. No matter the side, plaintiff or defendant, attorneys will agree that parties who can prove they were injured by a defendant’s…
Read more »
Monday August 17, 2020 By: Jeff Eberhard
From the desk of Gordon C. Klug: It should come as no surprise that a lawyer is prohibited from representing a new client where that new client’s interests are adverse to the interests of a former client and the matters are closely related. From a business standpoint, lawyers are also well-served to avoid these scenarios; especially in the case of…
Read more »
Wednesday August 12, 2020 By: Gordon Klug
Oregon Case Law Update: Oregon Supreme Court Limits Claims Based on Abuse of Vulnerable Persons From the desk of Bill Taaffe: Oregon’s statute on abuse of vulnerable persons (ORS 124.110)—here, elderly persons—provides plaintiffs with a claim against a person who wrongfully, or in bad faith, withholds a vulnerable person’s money or property.  The statute also provides for treble damages, giving the…
Read more »
Wednesday February 14, 2018 By: William Taaffe
Join Smith Freed Eberhard Managing Partner Jeff Eberhard and Partner Bill Taaffe as they provide a historical overview of the statutory noneconomic damages cap and discuss the future of the cap following recent landmark decisions by the Oregon Court of Appeals.  In this hour-long Webinar presentation, Jeff and Bill will discuss: The history of the statutory cap on noneconomic damages;…
Read more »
Thursday January 11, 2018 By: Jeff Eberhard
Smith Freed Eberhard Partner Josh Hayward as he discusses utilizing decision trees and probability analysis to evaluate claims. In this one hour presentation will discuss the methods and advantages to utilizing decision trees to evaluate claims, including: What decision trees are and how they can improve your claims evaluations; The advantages of utilizing decision trees; and How decision trees can improve…
Read more »
Thursday May 4, 2017 By: Josh Hayward
  Oregon Case Law Update: Safe Harbor Letter Not a Sure Thing From the Desk of Joshua P. Hayward: Under ORS 742.061, a first party plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees if they recover on a first party claim.  An exception to this rule applies in the uninsured (UM) or underinsured (UIM) context: insurers can avoid paying attorney fees if…
Read more »
Tuesday August 16, 2016 By: Josh Hayward
Smith Freed Eberhard Partner Bill Taaffe demonstrates how you can use technology and data to more effectively defend and settle your claims. Bill discusses: How to leverage social media to uncover and undermine claims Why email is a double-edged sword The truth about cell phone data and what types of data are practical and available for use How electronic discovery…
Read more »
Thursday July 21, 2016 By: William Taaffe
In an action based on an uninsured/underinsured (UM/UIM) motorist policy, does a “safe harbor” letter sent by the insurance company guarantee that some amount of damages must be awarded to its insured? Find out in this week’s case update. Claims Pointer: According to the Oregon Court of Appeals, the Oregon UM/UIM safe harbor statute specifically contemplates an insurer’s ability to…
Read more »
Thursday February 18, 2016 By: Firm Authorship
From the desk of Kyle Riley: When does an injury “arise out of” vehicle use for UIM coverage purposes? Claims Pointer: In order to provide a clear rule to determine when an injury “arises out of” vehicle use for the purposes of insurance coverage, the Washington Supreme Court concluded that an injury arises out of vehicle use if there is…
Read more »
Thursday January 28, 2016 By: Kyle Riley
Can a medical expert testify about emotional overlay? Can a biomechanical expert testify about the effect of crash speeds on the human body? Find out in this follow-up to last week’s update on an important Oregon Court of Appeals opinion. Claims Pointer: The Court of Appeals ruled in the following case that a biomechanical expert may testify regarding the forces…
Read more »
Thursday January 14, 2016 By: Firm Authorship
In the unlikely event that a first-party underinsured motorist (UIM) case goes to trial, it is often advantageous to make a motion before trial to exclude mention of insurance policies and policy limits. However, this strategy is not always available--as the following Oregon Court of Appeals case reveals. Claims Pointer: In the following case, an insurer denied UIM coverage and…
Read more »
Thursday January 7, 2016 By: Firm Authorship
SFE Attorney: Cliff Wilson Plaintiff Attorney: Paul Galm City, Co., State: Washington County Circuit Court, Oregon Claims Alleged: Personal Injury and Property Damage Injuries Alleged: Soft Tissue Admitted Liability: No Amount Claimed: $16,505.53 The Overview Team Cliff Wilson recently won a complete defense award in a hotly disputed liability case.  The case in question was a typical car collision in…
Read more »
Friday December 11, 2015 By: Cliff Wilson
From the desk of Jeffrey D. Eberhard: In a dram shop claim, the injured plaintiff sues the person or business who served alcohol to the person that harmed the plaintiff. In the following dram shop case, the Oregon Supreme Court answered the following important question: Is it always foreseeable that giving someone alcohol will make that person more violent? Claims…
Read more »
Thursday December 3, 2015 By: Jeff Eberhard
From the desk of Jeffrey D. Eberhard: In the conclusion of this special two-part update, we discuss an important question brought before the Oregon Court of Appeals: Can a national organization be liable for the negligence of a local chapter, which led to an alcohol-related sexual assault of a guest, when the national organization provides significant guidance and warnings to…
Read more »
Thursday November 12, 2015 By: Jeff Eberhard
From the desk of Jeffrey D. Eberhard: It is a bedrock principle of premises liability law that businesses and individuals alike owe a duty to protect customers and guests from foreseeable harm, which may also include harm from foreseeable criminal conduct. In the following case, the Oregon Court of Appeals examined whether a fraternity could have reasonably foreseen that one…
Read more »
Thursday November 5, 2015 By: Jeff Eberhard
In cases involving underinsured motorists (UIM) and personal injury protection benefits (PIP), Oregon allows insureds to recover attorney fees under ORS 742.061 if the insured sues the insurer and recovers more than the insurer offered to settle. Insurers can avoid paying attorney fees by sending a “safe harbor letter” to the insured after receiving “proof of loss.” The three necessary…
Read more »
Thursday October 15, 2015 By: Firm Authorship
Recent Posts