2015 ORS 31.555¹
Effect of advance payment
  • payment as satisfaction of judgment

(1) If judgment is entered against a party on whose behalf an advance payment referred to in ORS 31.560 (Advance payment for death or personal injury not admission of liability) or 31.565 (Advance payment for property damage not admission of liability) has been made and in favor of a party for whose benefit any such advance payment has been received, the amount of the judgment shall be reduced by the amount of any such payments in the manner provided in subsection (3) of this section. However, nothing in ORS 12.155 (Effect of notice of advance payment on running of period of limitation), 31.560 (Advance payment for death or personal injury not admission of liability) and 31.565 (Advance payment for property damage not admission of liability) and this section authorizes the person making such payments to recover such advance payment if no damages are awarded or to recover any amount by which the advance payment exceeds the award of damages.

(2) If judgment is entered against a party who is insured under a policy of liability insurance against such judgment and in favor of a party who has received benefits that have been the basis for a reimbursement payment by such insurer under ORS 742.534 (Reimbursement of other insurers paying benefits), the amount of the judgment shall be reduced by reason of such benefits in the manner provided in subsection (3) of this section.

(3)(a) The amount of any advance payment referred to in subsection (1) of this section may be submitted by the party making the payment, in the manner provided in ORCP 68 C(4) for the submission of disbursements.

(b) The amount of any benefits referred to in subsection (2) of this section, diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to the party in favor of whom the judgment was entered and diminished to an amount no greater than the reimbursement payment made by the insurer under ORS 742.534 (Reimbursement of other insurers paying benefits), may be submitted by the insurer which has made the reimbursement payment, in the manner provided in ORCP 68 C(4) for the submission of disbursements.

(c) Unless timely objections are filed as provided in ORCP 68 C(4), the court clerk shall apply the amounts claimed pursuant to this subsection in partial satisfaction of the judgment. Such partial satisfaction shall be allowed without regard to whether the party claiming the reduction is otherwise entitled to costs and disbursements in the action. [Formerly 18.510]

(formerly 18.510)

Notes of Decisions

Because 1) insurer's policy commits it to pay whatever its insured becomes liable to pay up to policy limits, 2) before judg­ment, reimburse­ment of PIP carrier is not in law pay­ment of insured's liability, and 3) amount that will be applicable to judg­ment may not yet be known, insurer is not entitled to pre-judg­ment credit for reimburse­ment. Kessler v. Weigandt, 68 Or App 180, 685 P2d 425 (1984), aff'd 299 Or 38, 699 P2d 183 (1985)

Where it could not be determined whether jury awarded damages already compensated for by PIP pay­ments, reduc­tion of offset allowed for PIP pay­ments was improper. Dougherty v. Gelco Express Corp., 79 Or App 490, 719 P2d 906 (1986)

PIP pay­ment to plaintiff does not reduce judg­ment where it can be determined jury did not award damages for losses compensated for by PIP pay­ment. Brus v. Goodell, 119 Or App 74, 849 P2d 562 (1993)

Where affidavit by attorney for insurer merely acknowledged propriety of reimburse­ment pro­ce­dure but did not obligate insurer to pay specific amount, refusal by court to issue order of partial satisfac­tion was proper. Heintz v. Baxter, 120 Or App 603, 853 P2d 320 (1993), Sup Ct review denied

Liability insurer repay­ment to other insurer for amount of Personal Injury Protec­tion pay­ment advanced by other insurer is reduc­tion in judg­ment amount having priority over attorney lien on judg­ment. Willhite v. Biff's Seafood Restaurant, Inc., 124 Or App 360, 862 P2d 580 (1993)

Reduc­tion of judg­ment by offsetting advance pay­ments received from insurer must be done after judg­ment has been entered for unreduced amount of verdict. Wade v. Mahler, 167 Or App 350, 1 P3d 485 (2000), Sup Ct review denied

Pay­ments made without considera­tion of liability for damages are not "advance pay­ments" triggering tolling of statute of limita­tions. Meoli v. Brown, 200 Or App 44, 114 P3d 507 (2005), Sup Ct review denied

State­ment that request to apply per­sonal injury protec­tion reimburse­ment pay­ment "may be submitted by insurer" does not render, for purposes of this statute, require­ments of ORCP 68C (4) equivocal. Medean v. Moeller, 246 Or App 717, 268 P3d 623 (2011)

(formerly 18.500 to 18.530)

Notes of Decisions

Advance pay­ment by an insurer for prop­erty damage, made without giving notice of the expira­tion date for per­sonal injury claim arising out of the same accident, suspends the opera­tion of the statute of limita­tions as to the per­sonal injury claim. Duncan v. Dubin, 276 Or 631, 556 P2d 105 (1976)

Pay­ment made by defendant's insurer to plaintiffs' car rental company prior to judg­ment is "advance pay­ment" and, where made without re­quired notice, tolls statute of limita­tions on plaintiffs' per­sonal injury ac­tion. Anais v. Dias, 70 Or App 478, 689 P2d 1011 (1984), Sup Ct review denied


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 31—Tort Actions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors031.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 31, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano031.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.