Legal Opinion · Dissent

Motorists Mutual Insurance v. Brandenburg

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 10, 1995No. 93-2099Published

1DissentCook, J.

As I believe that the majority is incorrect in its interpretation that R.C. 2721.09 is “statutory authority” for awarding attorney fees and there exists no other ground for allowing these fees here, I respectfully dissent.

I

R.C. 2721.09 provides, “[wjhenever necessary or proper, further relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree previously granted may be given. * * *” (Emphasis added.) The “further relief’ in this and similar declaratory judgment statutes from other states allows a court to grant consequential or incidental relief such as a money judgment, injunction, specific…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Motorists Mutual Insurance v. TrainorOhio Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Vance v. RoedersheimerOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. G. S. T. v. City of Avon LakeOhio Court of Appeals · 1978
  4. Chace v. Dorcy International, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. General Accident Assurance Corp. v. Motorists Mutl. Ins.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API