Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co.

1996 Ohio 362, 76 Ohio St. 3d 563

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 25, 1996

Docket1996-0462

StatusPublished

This text of 1996 Ohio 362 (Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co., 1996 Ohio 362, 76 Ohio St. 3d 563 (Ohio 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 76 Ohio St.3d 563.]

BOWERS ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. GRANGE INSURANCE COMPANY, A.K.A. GRANGE MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, A.K.A. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE. [Cite as Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co., 1996-Ohio-362.] Insurance—Automobile liability—Each person covered by an uninsured motorist policy who is asserting a claim for loss of consortium has a separate claim subject to a separate per person policy limit—Provision in insurance policy which reaches a contrary result is unenforceable. (No. 96-462—Submitted September 6, 1996—Decided September 25, 1996.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 95APE08-1110. __________________ Isaac, Brant, Ledman & Teetor and Marc J. Kessler, for appellants. Bale, Begin & Associates, Ltd., Andrew J. Kielkopf and David G. Bale, for appellee. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of Schaefer v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 553, ___ N.E.2d ___. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. COOK, J., dissents. STRATTON, J., not participating. __________________

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 76 Ohio St.3d 563.]

BOWERS ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. GRANGE INSURANCE COMPANY, A.K.A. GRANGE MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, A.K.A. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE. [Cite as Bowers v. Grange Ins. Co., 1996-Ohio-362.] Insurance—Automobile liability—Each person covered by an uninsured motorist policy who is asserting a claim for loss of consortium has a separate claim subject to a separate per person policy limit—Provision in insurance policy which reaches a contrary result is unenforceable. (No. 96-462—Submitted September 6, 1996—Decided September 25, 1996.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, No. 95APE08-1110. __________________ Isaac, Brant, Ledman & Teetor and Marc J. Kessler, for appellants. Bale, Begin & Associates, Ltd., Andrew J. Kielkopf and David G. Bale, for appellee. __________________ {¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of Schaefer v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 553, ___ N.E.2d ___. MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur. COOK, J., dissents. STRATTON, J., not participating. __________________

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1996 Ohio 362, 76 Ohio St. 3d 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowers-v-grange-ins-co-ohio-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack