Heiney v. Hartford

Ohio Supreme Court

Heiney v. Hartford

792 N.E.2d 1134, 99 Ohio St. 3d 1519

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedAugust 5, 2003

Docket2002-1505

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 792 N.E.2d 1134 (Heiney v. Hartford) 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

Heiney v. Hartford, 792 N.E.2d 1134, 99 Ohio St. 3d 1519 (Ohio 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Franklin App. No. 01AP-1100, 2002-0hio-3718. This cause, here on appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, was considered in the manner prescribed by law. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion for summary reversal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for summary reversal be, and hereby is, granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be remanded to the trial court to consider whether the insurer was prejudiced under Ferrando v. Auto-Owners Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Ohio St.3d 186, 2002-0hio-7217, 781 N.E.2d 927.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that oral argument scheduled for September 16, 2003, be, and hereby is, cancelled.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur.

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