Buckeye Union Insurance v. Zavarella Bros. Construction Co.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Patton, Judge.
The primary question in this case is whether an agreement by a construction subcontractor to name its general contractor as an additional insured on the subcontractor’s general commercial insurance policy constitutes an indemnity agreement prohibited by R.C. 2305.31. The trial court, having cross-motions for summary judgment before it, answered this question in the affirmative. We hold that the additional insured agreement does not violate public policy, but that the express language of the policy does not afford coverage under the circumstances.
The material facts are…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
- Blankenship v. Cincinnati Milacron Chemicals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
- Hawley v. RitleyOhio Supreme Court · 1988
- Kendall v. U.S. Dismantling Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
- McCabe/Marra Co. v. City of DoverOhio Court of Appeals · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Davis v. Ltv Steel Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1998
- Currier v. Penn-Ohio LogisticsOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance v. Woodfield Mall, L.L.C.Appellate Court of Illinois · 2010
- Currier v. Penn-Ohio LogisticsOhio Court of Appeals · 2010
- Toledo Edison Co. v. ABC Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.