Legal Opinion

Dorsey v. Federal Insurance

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 26, 2003No. 02 JE 26PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Waite, Presiding Judge.

{¶ 1} This case involves a dispute over whether or not two people injured in an automobile accident are entitled to receive underinsured motorist (“UIM”) benefits under the insurance coverage maintained by their employers. The injured plaintiffs believe that they should receive UIM benefits based on the principles set forth in Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (1999), 85 Ohio St.3d 660, 710 N.E.2d 1116. The issues in the instant case are not analogous to those in the Scott-Pontzer case because neither policy is governed by the mandatory aspects of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Martin v. Midwestern Group InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Lane v. Grange Mutual CompaniesOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Refiners Transport & Terminal Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Minor v. Allstate Ins. Co., Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1996

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ellis v. Nationwide InsuranceOhio Court of Appeals · 2005
  2. Magnus Int'l Grp., Inc. v. Forster, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County2018
  3. Peters v. Tipton, 07 Ha 3 (3-19-2008)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. Hale v. Ohio Dept. of Adm. Servs.Ohio Court of Claims · 2013
  5. Hertz Corporation v. Stanislav Babayev and Oleg ChikovSupreme Court of Colorado · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API