New York Central Rd. v. Linamen

171 Ohio St. (N.S.) 87
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedJune 8, 1960
DocketNo. 36230
StatusPublished

This text of 171 Ohio St. (N.S.) 87 (New York Central Rd. v. Linamen) 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
New York Central Rd. v. Linamen, 171 Ohio St. (N.S.) 87 (Ohio 1960).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Since plaintiff has neither alleged nor proved that any notice of Balo’s suit was given to defendant before its settlement or that the amount of that settlement and of the expenses incurred with respect to that suit and its settlement was fair and reasonable, plaintiff has not established any right to recover its claimed loss in payment of that settlement and those expenses. See Globe Indemnity Co. v. Schmitt, 142 Ohio St., 595.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the judgment of the Common Pleas Court is affirmed.

Judgment reversed.

Zimmerman, Taet, Matthias, Bell and Peck, JJ., concur. Weygandt, C. J., and Herbert, J., dissent.

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

Related

Globe Indemnity Co. v. Schmitt
53 N.E.2d 790 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1944)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
171 Ohio St. (N.S.) 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-york-central-rd-v-linamen-ohio-1960.