Court Opinion

ID: 9535721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:52:12.908947+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:18.765613
License: Public Domain

ARMSTRONG, J.,
dissenting.
The majority concludes that the evidence is insufficient to support a finding that defendant AOI had actual notice of plaintiffs new address and, therefore, that the address to which AOI sent the notice of cancellation was the “last known address” referred to in ORS 656.427C3).* 1 *Because *420I conclude that the statutory phrase “last known address” incorporates a duty of reasonable diligence to determine plaintiffs new address before sending the notice of cancellation, I dissent.
We have not had occasion to construe ORS 656.427(3). The pertinent language of the statute reads: “Notice under this section shall be given by mail, addressed to the employer at the last-known address of the employer.” (Emphasis added.) Under the terms of the parties’ contract for insurance, a mailing to the “address shown in item 1 on the Information Page” is sufficient notice of cancellation. The trial court held that, where defendants had actual notice that the address on the Information Page was incorrect, a mailing to that address could not satisfy the notice requirements of ORS 656.427(3), even though it may have satisfied the policy requirements. The court reasoned:
“* * * [Plaintiff] did send in a check on March 29th, which [AOI] show[s] receiving March 30th on the back of the check, in the exact amount of the next year’s premium. * * * [A]t least the check itself had a new address on it, and the processor at AOI was aware that there would be a new address because she was told that.
“Then a payroll report is submitted to the old address and returned by the post office as undeliverable on a nonworking address, and even with that information, the next communication from AOI is to the same stale and not working address [.]
“I believe that the policy was ineffectively canceled. I believe the agency should have done more to ascertain where they ought to be mailing their materials, particularly their cancellation notice when they already know the address is no good.”
In response to defendants’ retort that they had done all that was required under the policy by sending the cancellation to the address listed in the policy, the court stated:
“I find it facile, frankly, to send a cancellation notice to an address that the party knows is no good and then say, *421well, that’s all we had, that we’re just fulfilling our duties under the contract, we don’t have any more obligation other than what it says no matter what we know about the quality of the address.”
Defendants argue, and the majority appears to agree, that, without clear notice from plaintiff that its address had changed and that the address on the premium payment check should be noted as the new and correct address, it was unreasonable for the trial court to hold that AOI should have changed its records accordingly. Because the SE 31st Street address was the last address AOI had on file, and because the contract stated that the address on the policy’s Information Page was the address to which notice of cancellation would be sent, the majority concludes that the cancellation notice was effective. The majority further concludes that the contractual language is consistent with the statutory requirement that notice be sent to employer’s “last-known address.” I disagree.
This case is similar in many respects to Morris v. Dept. of Rev., 320 Or 579, 889 P2d 1294 (1995), in which the Supreme Court construed the phrase ‘last-known address” in ORS 305.265(11). Under that provision, the 90-day period for appeals to the Department of Revenue from a determination and assessment notice begins to run when notice has been mailed “to the person at the person’s last-known address.” The court held that, once the department had actual notice that plaintiffs address had changed, the last-known address was no longer the address the department had on file, but, rather, the new address, even if the department did not yet have actual notice of the new address:
“ ‘Last known address’ ordinarily refers to the address provided on the last Oregon income tax return filed by the taxpayer. * * * However, the ‘last-known address’changes if the department has actual notice that the taxpayer’s address has changed. Once the department has such notice, it is required to use reasonable diligence in ascertaining the taxpayer’s last-known address.”
Id. at 583-84 (citations omitted; emphasis added). In that case, the court found that the department had exercised *422reasonable diligence by contacting the Motor Vehicles Division for plaintiffs address after the department had been notified of the address change by the Internal Revenue Service. Id. at 584.
I am persuaded that the notice provision of ORS 656.427(3) is sufficiently similar to that of ORS 305.265(11) to apply the Supreme Court’s analysis in Morris to this case. The trial court found that AOI made no real attempt to ascertain plaintiffs correct address, even though three separate mailings had been returned to AOI as undeliverable. Applying the reasonable diligence standard from Morris, I conclude that the trial court did not err in holding that the cancellation was ineffective.
For the reasons given, I dissent.

 ORS 656.427 provides:
“(1) An insurer that issues a guaranty contract or a surety bond to an employer under this chapter may terminate liability on its contract or bond, as the case may be, by giving the employer and the director written notice of termination. A notice of termination shall state the effective date and hour of termination.
“(2) An insurer may terminate liability under this section as follows:
“(a) If the termination is for reasons other than those set forth in paragraph (b) of this subsection, it is effective at 12 midnight not less than 30 days after the date the notice is received by the director.
“(b) If the termination is based on the insurer’s decision not to offer insurance to employers within a specific premium category, it is effective not sooner than 90 days after the date the notice is received by the director.
“(3) Notice under this section shall be given by mail, addressed to the employer at the last-known address -of the employer. If the employer is a partnership, notice may be given to any of the partners. If the employer is a limited liability company, notice may be given to any manager, or in a member managed limited liability company, to any of the members. If the employer is a *420corporation, notice may be given to any agent or officer of the corporation under whom legal process may be served.”
(Emphasis added.)