Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 742.204 (2026)

Exceptions to standard fire insurance policy requirements

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      742.204 Exceptions to standard fire insurance policy requirements. Any insurance policy that includes, either on an unspecified basis as to coverage or for a single premium, coverage against the peril of fire and substantial coverage against other perils need not comply with the provisions of ORS 742.202 and 742.246, if such policy:

      (1) Affords coverage with respect to the peril of fire, not less than the substantial equivalent of the coverage afforded by the provisions of the standard fire insurance policy as required by ORS 742.202;

      (2) After a review under ORS 742.005 by the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services, is found by the director not to violate ORS 742.005 (2); and

      (3) Is complete as to all its terms without reference to the standard fire insurance policy or any other policy. [Formerly 743.607; 2001 c.85 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1993–2019 · leading case: Fleming v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 996 P.2d 501 (Or. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fleming v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 996 P.2d 501 (Or. 2000). · cites it 12× “202 and ORS 742.204, which, they contend, provide additional relevant context for construing the requirements in ORS 742.”
Summit Real Est. Mgmt., LLC v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 445 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “" The policies that Mid-Century issued to Summit are not standard fire insurance policies as described in ORS 742.”
Moore v. Mut. of Enumclaw Ins., 855 P.2d 626 (Or. 1993). “202 provides: “Except as provided in ORS 742.204, no fire insurer, its officers or agents, shall use any fire insurance policy or renew any fire insurance policy on property in this state unless it contains the provisions set forth in ORS 742.”
West Am. Ins. v. Hernandez, 669 F. Supp. 2d 1211 (D. Or. 2009). “202 itself contains a reference to § 742.204, which allows departure from the command of § 742.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 742.204(1) — 1 case
Fleming v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 996 P.2d 501 (Or. 2000). “202 and ORS 742.204, which, they contend, provide additional relevant context for construing the requirements in ORS 742.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.