Pilgrim

MEMORANDUM *

Julie Pilgrim sued Cigna for breach of contract and declaratory judgment arising from Cigna’s failure to pay proceeds from the UM/UIM insurance policy purchased by her late husband Man’s employer. The district court denied Pilgrim’s motion for partial summary judgment and granted summary judgment in Cigna’s favor on the ground that Aan was “not operating a covered auto at the time of his death.” 1 Pilgrim appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse.

As a preliminary matter, we agree with both Cigna and the district court that Or. Rev.Stat. § 742.500(2)(b) exempts large trucks from compulsory UM/UIM insurance when they are operated by an insured’s employee covered by workers’ compensation or a similar law. At all other times the same trucks are required to carry UM/UIM coverage. Both the plain meaning of the statutory language and the previous versions of the statute support this reading. See Krieger v. Just, 319 Or. 328 , 876 P.2d 754 (Or.1994); PGE v. Bureau of Labor & Indus., 317 Or. 606 , 859 P.2d 1143, 1145 (Or.1993) (words should be given their “plain, natural and ordinary meaning”).

In light of our reading of this statute, we…