Cincinnati Insurance v. ACE INA Holdings, Inc.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Mark P. Painter, Presiding Judge.
{¶ 1} We address a lost-policy insurance-coverage quarrel. We have to admit struggling with the issues' — -we even had one issue rebriefed by the parties. After much gnashing of teeth, we affirm. The aggregate policy limits applied annually; and the “deemer” clause was ineffective to limit liability on these facts.
J. The Parties and the Policies
{¶ 2} An excess insurer, plaintiff-appellant and cross-appellee The Cincinnati Insurance Company (“CIC”), sued the primary insurer, defendant-appellee and cross-appellant ACE INA Holdings (f.k.a. CIGNA Property &…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
- Doe v. ShafferOhio Supreme Court · 2000
- King v. Nationwide InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Zoppo v. Homestead InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Insurance Co. v. DutcherSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Andrea Perry v. Allstate Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2020
- Ma v. Cincinnati Children's Hosp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
- William Powell Co. v. OneBeacon Ins. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
- William Powell Co. v. Onebeacon Ins. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
- Groen v. Children's Hosp. Med. Ctr.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2012
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.