Legal Opinion · Dissent

Jennings v. City of Dayton

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 27, 1996No. 15670Published

1DissentGrady, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the decision of the majority.

The purpose of R.C. 3937.18(A) is to create liability coverage for tortfeasors who, as owners or operators of automobiles or other motor vehicles, are without it. The regulatory scheme it adopts to accomplish that purpose requires each automobile or motor vehicle liability “policy of insurance” delivered in the state to offer coverage for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are themselves legally entitled to recover damages for injury, sickness, or death from owners or operators of “uninsured motor vehicles.” In this regard…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Farm Automobile Insurance v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Refiners Transport & Terminal Corp.Ohio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Unigard Insurance v. Columbus Green Cabs, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API