Legal Opinion

Fazio v. Hamilton Mutual Insurance

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided October 12, 2005No. 2004-1559PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

{¶-1} This appeal presents two legal issues certified to us by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District: (1) Did the version of R.C. 3937.18 enacted by Sub.S.B. No. 267, 148 Ohio Laws, Part V, 11380, prohibit insurers from limiting the geographic scope of uninsured-motorist coverage and (2) if insurers were permitted to limit the geographic scope of uninsured-motorist coverage, does the limitation provision in State Farm’s policy restrict the geographic scope of uninsured-motorist coverage to the United States and Canada? We answer the first question in the negative and the second question…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wolfe v. WolfeOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State Farm Automobile Insurance v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Sexton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Bartlett v. Nationwide Mutual Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Stanton v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Howard v. Howard, 06ca755 (5-31-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
  2. State ex rel. Stone v. NormanOhio Court of Appeals · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API