Smith v. Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. Co.

Full title: MICHAEL WALTER SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MUTUAL OF ENUMCLAW INSURANCE…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Feb 12, 2014

No. 1:13-CV-1201-CL (D. Or. Feb. 12, 2014)

Opinion

No. 1:13-CV-1201-CL

02-12-2014

MICHAEL WALTER SMITH, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MUTUAL OF ENUMCLAW INSURANCE CO., Defendant.

OWEN M. PANNER

ORDER

PANNER, District Judge:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation (R&R), and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983).

I agree with the R&R that plaintiffs cannot bring an action against defendant until they submit to examinations under oath as required by defendant's insurance policy. See Gerke v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., 815 F. Supp. 2d 1190, 1202 (D. Or. 2011).

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#19) is adopted. Defendant's motion for summary judgment (#9) is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE