Legal Opinion

Smith v. Travelers Insurance

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1977No. 76-1046PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Per curiam

The specific question certified below is as follows:

“Whether a single canse of action for personal injuries may be divided to the extent that an insurer, subrogat-ed to the medical payments claim assigned by the insured, may prosecute this claim in a separate action against the tortfeasor?”

In the opinion written by Judge Holmes, the Court of Appeals below stated: “We feel that the latter position as taken by the Hamilton County Court of Appeals, in * * * [Hartford Accident Co. v. Elliott (1972), 32 Ohio App. 2d 281], is the more reasonable view, and one which would express the better public…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. DeCespedes v. Prudence Mut. Cas. Co. of Chicago, Ill.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1966
  2. Bernardini v. Home & Automobile InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 1965
  3. Davenport v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNevada Supreme Court · 1965
  4. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GelineWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
  5. National Union Fire Insurance Company v. GrimesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Ruby v. Midwestern Indemnity Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Erie Insurance Co. v. GeorgeIndiana Supreme Court · 1997
  3. In Re Dow Corning Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 2000
  4. Allstate Insurance v. ReitlerMontana Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Zinader v. Copley-Fairlawn City School DistrictOhio Court of Appeals · 1994

10 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