Jirousek v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSchneider, J.
The sole question involved in this appeal is whether the insured, who admittedly died of injuries received in an accident while operating his motorcycle, can qualify under either conditions (a) or (b) of the supplemental “Non-Occupational Vehicle Accident” provision. The opinion of this court is that he cannot.
In the trial court, the claim was made by plaintiff that the decedent’s motorcycle should be classified as a vehicle included in the language “. . . private automobile of pleasure car design....”
In both brief and oral argument, plaintiff has attempted to establish that the word…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Olmstead v. Lumbermens Mutual Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1970
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Hartzell Bros.Ohio Supreme Court · 1924
- Rose v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1933
3Cited by18 opinions
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. ReddickOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- Riley v. VIKING INSURANCE CO.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1987
- Rite Aid of Ohio, Inc. v. Marc's Variety Store, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1994
- Ambrose v. State Farm Fire & CasualtyOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
- Horsely v. United Ohio InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1991
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.