Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Uhrin

Ohio Supreme Court

Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Uhrin

550 N.E.2d 950, 49 Ohio St. 3d 162, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 102

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 7, 1990

DocketNo. 89-170

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 550 N.E.2d 950 (Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Uhrin) 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

Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Uhrin, 550 N.E.2d 950, 49 Ohio St. 3d 162, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 102 (Ohio 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

This case is reversed and remanded on authority of Howell v. Richardson (1989), 45 Ohio St. 3d 365, 544 N.E. 2d 878, paragraph two of the syllabus; and Kish v. Central Natl. Ins. Group of Omaha (1981), 67 Ohio St. 2d 41, 21 O.O. 3d 26, 424 N.E. 2d 288.

In reviewing Howell, supra, we discovered an error in paragraph one of the syllabus. That syllabus paragraph and the corresponding language in the body of the opinion at 368, 544 N.E. 2d at 881, is corrected to read as follows:

“Where a determination is made in an action instituted against a tortfeasor relative to his culpable mental state, collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of the determination in a supplemental proceeding brought against his insurer pursuant to R.C. 3929.06.”

Moyer, C.J.-, Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Re snick, JJ., concur.

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

This case is reversed and remanded on authority of Howell v. Richardson (1989), 45 Ohio St. 3d 365, 544 N.E. 2d 878, paragraph two of the syllabus; and Kish v. Central Natl. Ins. Group of Omaha (1981), 67 Ohio St. 2d 41, 21 O.O. 3d 26, 424 N.E. 2d 288.

In reviewing Howell, supra, we discovered an error in paragraph one of the syllabus. That syllabus paragraph and the corresponding language in the body of the opinion at 368, 544 N.E. 2d at 881, is corrected to read as follows:

“Where a determination is made in an action instituted against a tortfeasor relative to his culpable mental state, collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of the determination in a supplemental proceeding brought against his insurer pursuant to R.C. 3929.06.”

Moyer, C.J.-, Sweeney, Holmes, Douglas, Wright, H. Brown and Re snick, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

550 N.E.2d 950, 49 Ohio St. 3d 162, 1990 Ohio LEXIS 102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grange-mutual-casualty-co-v-uhrin-ohio-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack