Ohio Supreme Court, 2003

Wilson v. Haimerl

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided September 10, 2003 · Allen, Allow, App, Connor, Donnell, Galatis, Hio, Hold, Holding, Ins, Johnson, Law, Moyer, Nos, Pfeifer, Proposition, Propositions, Resnick, Stratton, Sweeney

99 Ohio St. 3d 1541; 795 N.E.2d 681

Opinion of the Court

Madison App. No. CA2002-08-017, 2003-0hio-1774. Discretionary appeal allowed on Proposition of Law No. I.

O’Connor, J., concurs but would also hold for the decision in 2002-1126 and 2002-1433, Allen v. Johnson, Wayne App. Nos. 01CA0046 and 01CA0047, 2002-0hio-3404. Moyer, C.J., concurs but would allow Proposition of Law No. I and hold for the decision in Allen; and would allow Proposition of Law No. II and hold for the decision in 2002-0932, Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, Summit App. No. 20784, 2002-0hio-1502. Lundberg Stratton and O’Donnell, JJ., concur but would allow all propositions of law without holding. Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., dissent.

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