Ohio Casualty Insurance v. Yoby

I respectfully dissent. Applying the ap plicable law to the facts of this case, it is my opinion that both appellants were entitled to relief under their respective policies.

It is clear that when an insurance policy or any of its terms or phrases are ambiguous and subject to different reasonable interpretations, the language must be construed against the insurer and in favor of the insured, to give the insured the greater coverage. Security Finance Co. v. Aetna Ins. Co. (1971), 26 Ohio St. 2d 135, at 138 [55 O.O.2d 242]; Buckeye Union Ins. Co. v. Price (1974), 39 Ohio St. 2d 95 [68 O.O.2d…