Legal Opinion · Dissent

Miller v. Marrocco

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 1986No. 86-347Published

1DissentClifford F. Brown, J.

The sole issue in this action is whether the appellant is covered in his individual capacity under the insurance policy carried by his professional corporation. Because the majority erroneously excludes the appellant doctor from coverage under the corporate policy, I dissent.

The corporate insurance policy states that the insurance company “agrees to defend and pay damages, in the name and on behalf of the insured, * * * in any claim for damages, at any time filed, based on professional services rendered or which should have been rendered, by the insured or any other person for whose acts or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Louis Zavota v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation Ltd., Maryland Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API