Legal Opinion

Duriak v. Globe American Casualty Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1986No. 86-132PublishedCited by 53 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellants raise four propositions of law. For the following reasons we reject those propositions and find for appellees.

I

Appellants first argue that an uninsured motorist claim in an insurance policy may not be limited under the terms of the policy to a period of one year. This identical issue was raised, analyzed, and resolved in Colvin v. Globe American Cas. Co. (1982), 69 Ohio St. 2d 293 [23 O.O.3d 281], We reaffirm Colvin and decline to accept appellants’ invitation to overrule it.

II

Appellants next assert that because Globe became subrogated to the collision claim, and acted against the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hounshell v. American States InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Bartlett v. Nationwide Mutual Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Colvin v. Globe American Casualty Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Gugle v. LoeserOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Cincinnati Insurance Co. v. SiemensOhio Court of Appeals · 1984

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

3Cited by53 opinions

  1. Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Kraly v. VannewkirkOhio Supreme Court · 1994
  3. United National Insurance v. DePrizioIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Lane v. Grange Mutual CompaniesOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  5. Gyori v. Johnston Coca-Cola Bottling Group, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996

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