Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Insurance v. Diebold, Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 13, 1989No. 11482PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Fain, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment in the amount of $18,800 recovered by plaintiff-appellee Cincinnati Insurance Company (“CIC”) against defendant-appellant Diebold, Inc., together with an award of attorney fees in the amount of $5,005. Diebold contends that its employee, Kelly Moore, was not acting within the course and scope of his employment when he stole $18,800 in money contained in one safe-deposit box while “drilling” (changing the locks on) nine safe-deposit boxes pursuant to a contract between his employer and CIC’s subrogor, Farmer’s Banking Company, N.A. (“Farmer’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fulks v. FulksOhio Court of Appeals · 1953
  2. Sanfillipo v. RardenOhio Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Direct Transportation Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadOhio Court of Appeals · 1953
  4. Jackson v. BryantOhio Court of Appeals · 1929

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McQuillan v. Mercedes-Benz Credit Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  2. S & D Mechanical Contractors, Inc. v. Enting Water Conditioning Systems, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1991
  3. National Hydro-Vac Industrial Services, L.L.C. v. Federal Signal Corp. (In Re National Hydro-Vac Industrial Services, L.L.C.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · 2004
  4. Beerman Realty Co. v. Alloyd Asbestos Abatement Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
  5. Schuldies v. MillarSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API