Legal Opinion · Dissent

Community Insurance v. Ohio Department of Transportation

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 2001No. 00-771Published

1DissentDouglas, J.

I must respectfully dissent. The majority concludes that R.C. 2743.02(D) bars subrogation actions brought by insurers against the state. The majority holds that an insurer cannot have an independent claim, based upon a subrogation agreement with their insured, for damages against the state. I disagree.

I

The majority states that it finds “no support for concluding that the General Assembly intended that subrogation claims against the state should be treated differently from subrogation claims against political subdivisions.” (Emphasis added.) However, today’s decision ignores the state’s waiver…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  2. Gladon v. Greater Cleveland Regional Transit AuthorityOhio Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Haverlack v. Portage Homes, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Krause v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Menefee v. Queen City MetroOhio Supreme Court · 1990

9 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