Saunders v. Mortensen

Ohio Supreme Court

Saunders v. Mortensen

783 N.E.2d 518, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1458

CourtOhio Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 19, 2003

Docket2002-2138

StatusPublished

This text of 783 N.E.2d 518 (Saunders v. Mortensen) 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

Saunders v. Mortensen, 783 N.E.2d 518, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1458 (Ohio 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Erie App. No. E-02-008, 2002-Ohio-6244. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 11 of the court of appeals’ Decision and Judgment Entry dated November 15, 2002:

“The question presented is whether the language of Nationwide Insurance Endorsement 2352 may be reasonably construed in the manner articulated by this court and the Franklin County Court of Appeals in Nicolini-Brownfield v. Eigensee (Sept. 16, 1999), Franklin App. No. 98AP-1244 [1999 WL 717308], so as to give rise to an ambiguity in underinsured motorists coverage.”

Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.

The conflict case is Carroll v. Allstate Ins. Co., 148 Ohio App.3d 413, 2002-Ohio-3074, 773 N.E.2d 1061.

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

Erie App. No. E-02-008, 2002-Ohio-6244. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 11 of the court of appeals’ Decision and Judgment Entry dated November 15, 2002:

“The question presented is whether the language of Nationwide Insurance Endorsement 2352 may be reasonably construed in the manner articulated by this court and the Franklin County Court of Appeals in Nicolini-Brownfield v. Eigensee (Sept. 16, 1999), Franklin App. No. 98AP-1244 [1999 WL 717308], so as to give rise to an ambiguity in underinsured motorists coverage.”

Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.

The conflict case is Carroll v. Allstate Ins. Co., 148 Ohio App.3d 413, 2002-Ohio-3074, 773 N.E.2d 1061.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

783 N.E.2d 518, 98 Ohio St. 3d 1458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saunders-v-mortensen-ohio-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack