Ohio Supreme Court, 2003

Heiney v. Hartford

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided August 5, 2003 · Connor, Donnell, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

99 Ohio St. 3d 1519; 792 N.E.2d 1134

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Parrish v. Coles, 06ap-696 (6-26-2007) (Ohio Ct. App. 2007)
Hammock v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., Unpublished Decision (9-26-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Franklin App. No. 01AP-1100, 2002-0hio-3718. This cause, here on appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County, was considered in the manner prescribed by law. Upon consideration of appellant’s motion for summary reversal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motion for summary reversal be, and hereby is, granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that this cause be remanded to the trial court to consider whether the insurer was prejudiced under Ferrando v. Auto-Owners Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Ohio St.3d 186, 2002-0hio-7217, 781 N.E.2d 927.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that oral argument scheduled for September 16, 2003, be, and hereby is, cancelled.

Moyer, C.J., Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor and O’Donnell, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.