U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2005

Ashby v. Farmers Insurance

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 4, 2005 · Bybee, Hug, Reinhardt

143 F. App'x 55

Counsel

Charles A. Ringo, Beaverton, OR, N. Robert Stoll, David F. Rees, Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Schlachter, PC, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellant., Steve D. Larson,Scott A. Shorr, Stoll Stoll Berne Lokting & Schlachter, PC, Portland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellant and Plaintiffs., Barnes H. Ellis, James N. Westwood, Stoel Rives, LLP, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellee and Defendant., Stephen A. Redshaw, Stoel Rives, LLP, Portland, OR, for Defendant-Appellee.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

J. Lilly, LLC v. Clearspan Fabric Structures International, Inc. (District Court, D. Oregon 2020)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM**

Plaintiffs appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Relying on its previous decision in Mark v. Valley Insurance Co., 275 F.Supp.2d 1307, 1317 (D.Or. 2003), the district court held that, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, there can be no “increase in any charge” if the policy is an initial policy and the rate is *56the first rate charged to the consumer. It also held that no adverse action occurs if the insurance company renews a policy at the same rate it previously charged the consumer. In light of Edo v. GEICO Casualty Co., No. 04-35279, we overrule these holdings and reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with that opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.