In a landmark decision affecting environmental insurance claims, the Oregon Supreme Court clarified the scope of the “contribution bar” under the Oregon Environmental Cleanup Assistance Act (OECAA). In Continental Casualty Co. v. Argonaut Ins. Co., 373 Or. 389 (2025), the Court held that OECAA’s good-faith settlement bar applies only if a settlement resolves the same
Notice of Appeal
The Stoel Rives Appellate Law Blog
Blog Authors
Latest from Notice of Appeal
The Evolving Landscape of Bad-Faith Law in Oregon: A Year After Moody v. Oregon Community Credit Union
The 2023 Moody v. Oregon Community Credit Union decision reshaped Oregon’s bad-faith insurance law, allowing policyholders to claim emotional distress damages under Oregon’s Unfair Claim Settlement Practices Act (ORS 746.230) without proving physical impact. This ruling has since expanded insurer liability and introduced new remedies for bad-faith practices.
Key takeaways:
- Broader Insurer Liability: Emotional distress
…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: The Court Clarifies How to Add a Request for Punitive Damages
By Cory Carone
In Davis v. Blast Properties, Inc., the Idaho Supreme Court clarified the standard trial courts should apply when deciding whether to grant a party leave to seek punitive damages. The Court held that trial courts are not required to conduct an evidentiary hearing, but trial courts are required to conduct “a careful examination of…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: The Court’s original jurisdiction is limited, but the Legislature’s regulation of executive rulemaking is not
On January 29, 2024, the Idaho Supreme Court issued an opinion in Idaho State Athletic Commission v. Office of the Administrative Rules Coordinator. In the decision, the Court held that it does not have original jurisdiction to decide declaratory actions and affirmed the Legislature’s power to pre-approve rules promulgated by executive agencies.
The facts.…
The Mood Swings on Insurer Bad-Faith in Oregon: An Analysis of the Oregon Supreme Court Decision in Moody v. Oregon Community Credit Union
The Oregon Supreme Court has long held the legislature did not create a private right of action under the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (ORS 746.230). Policyholders could bring a tort claim against their insurance company only if the insurer was subject to a standard of care independent of the insurance policy.[i] But the…
Washington Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects the Apex Doctrine
In Stratford v. Umpqua Bank, No. 100717-5 (Sept. 14, 2023) (slip op.), the Washington Supreme Court rejected the application of the “apex doctrine” in Washington. The apex doctrine has been adopted by some jurisdictions to shield high-level executives and officials from being deposed. See, e.g., Robinett v. Opus Bank, No. C12-1755MJP, 2013 WL 5850873, at…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: The Risks of Cross Appeals
We recently addressed the Idaho Supreme Court’s decision in 616 Inc. v. Mae Properties, LLC, No. 49190 (Feb. 8, 2023), and specifically the essential elements of a lease. The decision also includes an important appellate practice point regarding the risks of pursuing a cross-appeal.
As a reminder, 616 Inc. appealed from the district…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: Attorney’s Fees in Real Estate Litigation Under Idaho Code § 12-120(3)
On February 14, 2023, the Court released a unanimous decision in Treasure Valley Home Solutions, LLC v. Chason. This post will focus on the Court’s analysis of when a real estate transaction is a commercial transaction such that attorney’s fees can be awarded under Idaho Code § 12-120(3), as that analysis may create confusion…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: Idaho’s catch-all statute of limitations revokes any common law rule that a claim cannot be time barred
On January 25, 2023, the Court issued a substitute opinion in Easterling v. HAL Pacific Properties. The decision, which was decided 3-2, provides insights into the Court’s views on statutory interpretation and construction. It also addresses actions that fall within Idaho’s catch-all statute of limitations, Idaho Code § 5-224.
The facts. The case concerns…
Idaho Supreme Court Update: Idaho’s catch-all statute of limitations revokes any common law rule that a claim cannot be time barred
On January 25, 2023, the Court issued a substitute opinion in Easterling v. HAL Pacific Properties. The decision, which was decided 3-2, provides insights into the Court’s views on statutory interpretation and construction. It also addresses actions that fall within Idaho’s catch-all statute of limitations, Idaho Code § 5-224.
The facts. The case concerns…