Lamb Weston Intercompany Agreement

 Third, there is an even more fundamental problem with the defendant`s theory.   If, on the other hand, there is double insurance coverage, the substitution theory does not apply by law.   Rather, it depends on the agreement of the parties.  Hartford v. Aetna Mt Hood Radio, 270 Gold. 226, 233, 527 pp. 2d 406 (1974).   It is indisputable that on January 11, 2007, the Dodsons first asked the defendant to lift their policy.   Indeed, the agreement between the Dodsons and the defendant, which embodied the Dodsons` right to cancel the policy at the time of the loss of the object, was in politics itself.   As noted above, paragraph 2 of the policy`s “Terms and Conditions” provided that “[insureds] may terminate the policy at any time by sending it back to us or advising us on the current or future date of the retraction.” , leased a Dick Shafer truck for its use in its heirs` can and freeze operation. This included transporting water to crews in pea fields.

Nathan Cole, an employee of Lamb-Weston, Inc., was driving the truck. On the evening of June 18, 1956, Cole drove by truck to Elgin, Oregon, where he lived to repair the defective brakes and gears, a condition he had noticed for some time. He had been advised to have the brakes repaired in Elgin. About two miles from Elgin, his axis refused to “engage,” his engine died, and his brakes did not stop on a slope, and he lost control of the truck and crashed into a Union De Grain Growers County warehouse and damaged it. The Union County Grain Growers claimed damages and threatened legal action. Applicant Lamb-Weston, Inc., paid the debt and borrowed the amount paid by its insurer St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Company, a subsidiary of St. Paul Fire – Marine Insurance Company, on a “credit document.” 6. It is also argued that the credit authorization agreement was a “sham and an infiltration”. However, Oregon recognizes these transactions as entirely legal and effective, depending on the intent of the parties.

Furrer v. Yew Creek Logging Co., 206 Gold 382, 292 P2d 499. There is no other indication here of intent than that expressed in the instrument itself. We conclude that a valid borrower-lender agreement has been designed and implemented. The Lamb-Weston rule ignores the basic rule of contracts that require consideration of the language of insurance in determining the meaning and intent of the insurance clause. The Lamb-Weston regime is considered a better rule of law.

Comments are closed.