Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Oregon Supreme Court· 7/29/1994

Ledford v. Gutoski

Citations

  • 877 P.2d 80
  • 319 Or. 397
  • 1994 Ore. LEXIS 69

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “[injuries resulting from intentional acts are excluded from insurance coverage when the insured intended to cause the particular injury or harm, as opposed to merely intending the act”
  • explaining that the duty to defend is determined by comparing the allegations in the complaint to the terms in the policy
  • explaining that the duty to defend is determined by comparing the allegations in the complaint to the terms in the policy
  • noting that, where an insurer does not have a duty to defend based on the facts alleged in the complaint, it may still be possible to demonstrate a duty to indemnify based on the facts proven at trial
  • relying on an affidavit in the summary judgment record to resolve a fact not adjudicated in the underlying proceeding
  • insurer should be able to determine from face of complaint whether to accept tender of defense of action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Unis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

73 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Ledford v. Gutoski

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.