Pittsburgh National Bank v. Motorists Mutual Insurance
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Quillin, Presiding Judge.
The question presented in this appeal is whether a loss payable clause contained in an automobile insurance policy requires payment to the mortgagee where the insured has intentionally destroyed the car. We affirm the trial court’s decision, and hold that appellee Pittsburgh National'Bank, (“Pittsburgh”) the mortgagee, was entitled to payment under the policy.
Robert Peterson purchased a Chevrolet Blazer and executed a security agreement with Pittsburgh. The agreement listed the Blazer as collateral and required Peterson to maintain insurance upon it. Peterson…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Foremost Insurance v. Allstate InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
- Gibbons-Grable Co. v. Gilbane Building Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1986
- Gibraltar Financial Corp. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
- Don Chapman Motor Sales, Inc. v. National Savings Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Western Fire Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1970
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Wells Fargo Equipment Finance, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2011
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. DempseyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Ltd. Invest. Group Corp. v. Huntington Natl. BankOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
- Wells Fargo Equipment Finance, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2012
- Barwick v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.