Washington v. Citizens Security Mutual Insurance

Ohio Supreme Court July 5, 2001

Washington v. Citizens Security Mutual Insurance, 92 Ohio St. 3d 211 (Ohio 2001)

Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

Opinion of the Court

The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of Littrell v. Wigglesworth (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 425, 746 N.E.2d 1077, and Clark v. Scarpelli (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 271, 744 N.E.2d 719.

Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur. Moyer, C.J., Cook, and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur in judgment.

Concurring Opinion

Cook, J.,

concurring. I concur in judgment on Propositions of Law Nos. I and II based on the reasoning set forth in my dissenting opinion in Littrell v. Wigglesworth (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 425, 746 N.E.2d 1077, and in my opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part in Clark v. Scarpelli (2001), 91 Ohio St.3d 271, 744 N.E.2d 719. I would dismiss Proposition of Law III as having been improvidently allowed.

Moyer, C.J., and Lundberg Stratton, J., concur in the foregoing opinion.

Reference

Full Case Name: Washington, Gdn. v. Citizens Security Mutual Insurance Company
Status: Published