Legal Opinion

Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance v. Guman Bros. Farm

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 16, 1995No. 94-1113PublishedCited by 297 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCook, J.

This case presents two issues. We first determine that the court of appeals properly reviewed the trial court decision de novo because the interpretation of a clear and unambiguous insurance contract is a matter of law. Second, we conclude that a student who works part of the school day in an OWE program nevertheless qualifies as an “employee” while at work.

I

In his first proposition of law, Mercer argues that the judgment of the trial court was a factual determination rather than a legal interpretation, and that the appellate court’s de novo review was therefore erroneous. Mercer contends…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Inland Refuse Transfer Co. v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Ohio, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Karabin v. State Automobile Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Miller v. MarroccoOhio Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by297 opinions

  1. Graham v. Drydock Coal Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Taylor Building Corp. of America v. BenfieldOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  3. Saunders v. MortensenOhio Supreme Court · 2004
  4. City of St. Marys v. Auglaize County Board of CommissionersOhio Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Guman Bros. FarmOhio Supreme Court · 1995

292 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