State v. Jones
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
I
Appellant, in its first proposition of law, essentially asserts that the doctrine of subrogation should allow its claim to have priority over the undiscovered but properly recorded claim of the state.
In a broad sense, one person is subrogated to certain rights of another person where he is substituted in the place *101of such other person so that he succeeds to those rights of the other person. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hensgen (1970), 22 Ohio St. 2d 83.
The doctrine of subrogation incorporates both conventional subrogation and legal (or equitable) subrogation. Conventional subrogation is premised…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fort Dodge Building & Loan Ass'n v. ScottSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892
- Federal Union Life Ins. v. DeitschOhio Supreme Court · 1934
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. HensgenOhio Supreme Court · 1970
- Canton Morris Plan Bank v. MostOhio Court of Appeals · 1932
- Harshman v. HarshmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Chemtrol Adhesives, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- Blue Cross v. HrenkoOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- PIE Mutual Insurance v. Ohio Insurance Guaranty Ass'nOhio Supreme Court · 1993
- Bavely v. Huntington National Bank (In Re Cowan)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- ABN AMRO Mortgage Group, Inc. v. KangahOhio Supreme Court · 2010
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.