Santana v. Auto-Owners Insurance

Ohio Supreme Court

Santana v. Auto-Owners Insurance

631 N.E.2d 123, 69 Ohio St. 3d 182

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedMay 4, 1994

DocketNo. 93-1349

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 631 N.E.2d 123 (Santana v. Auto-Owners Insurance) 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

Santana v. Auto-Owners Insurance, 631 N.E.2d 123, 69 Ohio St. 3d 182 (Ohio 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

This cause is before this court upon the certification of the Court of Appeals for Lucas County that its judgment conflicted with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Mahoning County in Miller v. Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. (1969), 20 Ohio App.2d 323, 49 O.O.2d 451, 253 N.E.2d 801.

Having examined Miller and the record in the present cause, we find that the judgments do not conflict. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Copeco, Inc. v. Caley (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 79, 630 N.E.2d 662; Whitelock v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 594, 613 N.E.2d 1032; Freeman v. Holzer Med. Ctr. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 601, 613 N.E.2d 1037; State v. Parobek (1990) 49 Ohio St.3d 61, 550 N.E.2d 476; State v. Radar (1989), 47 Ohio St.3d 112, 548 N.E.2d 210; Hays v. St. Elizabeth Hosp. Med. Ctr. (1988), 38 Ohio St.3d 60, 526 N.E.2d 307; Cook v. Mayfield (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 44, 523 N.E.2d 502; State v. Palider (1987), 33 Ohio St.3d 68, 514 N.E.2d 873.

Moyer, C.J., AW. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Christley, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Judith A Christley, J., of the Eleventh Appellate District, sitting for Resnick, J.

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

This cause is before this court upon the certification of the Court of Appeals for Lucas County that its judgment conflicted with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Mahoning County in Miller v. Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. (1969), 20 Ohio App.2d 323, 49 O.O.2d 451, 253 N.E.2d 801.

Having examined Miller and the record in the present cause, we find that the judgments do not conflict. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Copeco, Inc. v. Caley (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 79, 630 N.E.2d 662; Whitelock v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 594, 613 N.E.2d 1032; Freeman v. Holzer Med. Ctr. (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 601, 613 N.E.2d 1037; State v. Parobek (1990) 49 Ohio St.3d 61, 550 N.E.2d 476; State v. Radar (1989), 47 Ohio St.3d 112, 548 N.E.2d 210; Hays v. St. Elizabeth Hosp. Med. Ctr. (1988), 38 Ohio St.3d 60, 526 N.E.2d 307; Cook v. Mayfield (1988), 37 Ohio St.3d 44, 523 N.E.2d 502; State v. Palider (1987), 33 Ohio St.3d 68, 514 N.E.2d 873.

Moyer, C.J., AW. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Christley, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Judith A Christley, J., of the Eleventh Appellate District, sitting for Resnick, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

631 N.E.2d 123, 69 Ohio St. 3d 182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santana-v-auto-owners-insurance-ohio-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack