Legal Opinion

Bennett v. Swift & Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1959No. 35931Published

1Opinion of the CourtPeck, J.

Section 3929.06, Revised Code, provides that a plaintiff who has recovered a final judgment for loss or damage on account of bodily injury may proceed directly against the defendant’s insurer if the judgment remains unsatisfied for a period of 30 days, and that this remedy may be sought in the action in which the judgment was obtained. Under that authority the plaintiff filed his supplemental petition against the insurer of the defaulting defendant, Mathews, Inc. It is well established that the rights of such a plaintiff against the in*171surer canuot rise above those of the insured, and that any…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Luntz v. SternOhio Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Stacey v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1926
  3. London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. ShaferDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1940
  4. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. OlesOhio Court of Appeals · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API