Hixson v. Callentine

824 N.E.2d 539, 105 Ohio St. 3d 1469
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 23, 2005
Docket2005-0290
StatusPublished

This text of 824 N.E.2d 539 (Hixson v. Callentine) 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
Hixson v. Callentine, 824 N.E.2d 539, 105 Ohio St. 3d 1469 (Ohio 2005).

Opinion

Athens App. No. 04 CA 4, 2004-Ohio-5943. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 6 of the court of appeals’ judgment entry filed January 14, 2005:

“Whether any language in the liability portion of an insurance policy restricting liability coverage carries over to restrict UM7UIM coverage that arises by operation of law when an ‘insured’, as defined by the automotive policy, is injured by an underinsured motorist.”

Moyer, C.J., and Resnick, J., dissent.

The conflict case is Mason v. Royal Ins. Co. of Am., Stark App. No. 2003CA00029, 2003-Ohio-7047.

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

Related

Hixson v. Callentine
823 N.E.2d 459 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
824 N.E.2d 539, 105 Ohio St. 3d 1469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hixson-v-callentine-ohio-2005.