Wright v. Turner

Former ORS 742.504(1) required such policies to cover “all sums which the insured shall be legally entitled to recover from the owner or operator of an uninsured vehicle because of bodily injury sustained by the insured caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured vehicle.”

This case regards a dispute between an insured and her insurance company over the limits of her Underinsured Motorist (UIM) coverage. The Defendant argued the trial court erred in its instruction to the jury and the jury should have been instructed to apportion the plaintiff’s damages between the two accidents. The Defendant argued that the jury instruction which explained that if the jury could not “separate the cause of plaintiff’s injuries,” then the injuries were “indivisible” and apportionment between the two accidents was not required was incorrect because apportionment was necessary and could impact the amount that the plaintiff was entitled too. Plaintiff argued that it was necessary for the jury to determine whether it was possible to divide the damages and, only if they decided it was possible, should it be necessary to determine the damages of each accident. Former ORS 742.504(1) required such policies to cover “all sums which the insured shall be legally entitled to recover from the owner or operator of an uninsured vehicle because of bodily injury sustained by the insured caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured vehicle.” The Court found that the law permits the jury to decide the matter of fact, whether the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by two separate accidents. The jury instructions were valid, and the trial court did not need to instruct the jury that it must apportion the damages between the two accidents. The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.