Legal Opinion

Kurent v. Farmers Insurance of Columbus, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 18, 1991No. 90-1633PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerbert R. Brown, J.

The sole issue before the court is whether the Kurents are entitled to uninsured motorist benefits under their policy with Farmers for an automobile accident that occurred in Michigan and was caused by a Michigan resident who is insured pursuant to Michigan’s no-fault insurance laws. For the reasons which follow we hold that the Kurents are not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage.

The basis of Farmers’ obligation to the Kurents lies in the insurance contract and our analysis begins with an examination of the policy as it *244applied when the Kurents entered Michigan and became involved in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Morgan v. Biro Manufacturing Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Bogan v. Progressive Casualty InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. WebbOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. York v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Sumwalt v. Allstate InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. Ohayon v. Safeco InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. GilletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State Farm Automobile Insurance v. AlexanderOhio Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Tricia Miller, of the Estate of Rhonda Bishop v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
  5. Johnson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2005

48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API