Smith v. Matten, L-07-1408 (8-22-2008)
This text of 2008 Ohio 4275 (Smith v. Matten, L-07-1408 (8-22-2008)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
{¶ 2} Appellant asserts one assignment of error:
{¶ 3} "The trial court erred when it found the AF policy provision excluding a vehicle owned or operated by a governmental unit of agency from the definition of uninsured motor vehicle void as against public policy."
{¶ 4} Recently, the Supreme Court of Ohio in Rogers v. Dayton, 118 Ohio St.3d 299,
{¶ 5} On the above authority, appellant's sole assignment of error is found well-taken.
{¶ 6} On consideration whereof, we find that substantial justice was not done the party complaining and the judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. Costs to appellees pursuant to App. R. 24. Judgment for the clerk's expense incurred in preparation of the record, fees allowed by law, and the fee for filing the appeal is awarded to Lucas County.
*Page 3JUDGMENT REVERSED.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to App. R. 27. See, also, 6th Dist. Loc. App. R. 4.
*Page 1Arlene Singer, J., William J. Skow, J., Thomas J. Osowik, J., CONCUR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2008 Ohio 4275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-matten-l-07-1408-8-22-2008-ohioctapp-2008.