Gilchrist v. Gonsor

*603{¶ 14} I respectfully dissent. Because United Rentals, Inc. (“URI”) bore the ultimate responsibility for the risk of loss, I believe that its “fronting policy” was self-insurance in the practical sense. Therefore, we should apply the rationale of Grange Mut. Cas. Co. v. Refiners Transport & Terminal Corp. (1986), 21 Ohio St.3d 47, 21 OBR 331, 487 N.E.2d 310, and reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.

{¶ 15} The majority concludes in a two-sentence analysis: “URI and USF & G entered into an agreement, which is titled and referred to throughout as a commercial insurance policy. * * *…