Legal Opinion

Seifert v. Burroughs

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 1988No. 87-1194PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.

The law of Ohio is well-settled that an injured party is entitled to only one satisfaction for his injuries, “and that receipt of full compensation from one of several persons whose concurrent acts of negligence are the basis of a suit for damages for personal injuries releases all.” (Emphasis added.) Royal Indemnity Co. v. Becker (1930), 122 Ohio St. 582, 589, 173 N.E. 194, 196; see, also, id. at paragraph one of the syllabus.

More particularly, we have held that “in an action to recover damages * * * claimed to have been caused by * * * two defendants [where] the amount of damages sustained…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gholson v. SavinOhio Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Royan Indemnity Co. v. BeckerOhio Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Cleveland Ry. Co. v. NickelOhio Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Blodgett v. BlodgettOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Ohio Power Co. v. OgleOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
  3. In Re Miamisburg Train Derailment LitigationOhio Court of Appeals · 1999
  4. Ginn v. Stonecreek Dental CareOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
  5. Baatz v. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2018

6 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