Borsick v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. , 1993 Ohio 50 ( 1993 )


Menu:
  •              OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
    The full texts of the opinions of the Supreme Court of
    Ohio are being transmitted electronically beginning May 27,
    1992, pursuant to a pilot project implemented by Chief Justice
    Thomas J. Moyer.
    Please call any errors to the attention of the Reporter's
    Office of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Attention: Walter S.
    Kobalka, Reporter, or Deborah J. Barrett, Administrative
    Assistant. Tel.: (614) 466-4961; in Ohio 1-800-826-9010.
    Your comments on this pilot project are also welcome.
    NOTE: Corrections may be made by the Supreme Court to the
    full texts of the opinions after they have been released
    electronically to the public. The reader is therefore advised
    to check the bound volumes of Ohio St.3d published by West
    Publishing Company for the final versions of these opinions.
    The advance sheets to Ohio St.3d will also contain the volume
    and page numbers where the opinions will be found in the bound
    volumes of the Ohio Official Reports.
    Borsick et al., Appellants and Cross-Appellees, v. State Farm
    Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellee and
    Cross-Appellant.
    [Cite as Borsick v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.     Ohio St.
    3d    .]
    Insurance -- Underinsured motorist coverage -- Wrongful death
    claim -- Each person entitled to recover under R.C.
    2125.02 has separate claim subject to any per accident
    limit -- Insurers may contractually preclude intrafamily
    stacking but may not contractually preclude interfamily
    stacking -- Underinsurance claim must be paid, when --
    Each person who is covered by an uninsured/underinsured
    policy has a separate claim subject to a per person policy
    limit.
    (No. 93-1066 -- Submitted November 10, 1993 -- Decided
    December 29, 1993.)
    Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Erie County, No.
    E-92-26.
    Murray & Murray Co., L.P.A., Dennis E. Murray, Sr., and
    Kirk J. Delli Bovi, for appellants and cross-appellees.
    Meyers, Hentemann, Schneider & Rea Co., L.P.A., and Henry
    A. Hentemann, for appellee and cross-appellant.
    Pursuant to Savoie v. Grange Mut. Ins. Co. (1993), 
    67 Ohio St. 3d 500
    ,     N.E.2d     , the judgment of the Court of
    Appeals for Erie County is reversed.
    A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer,
    JJ., concur.
    Moyer, C.J., concurs separately.
    Wright, J., dissents.
    Moyer, C.J., concurring separately.     I concur separately
    in the judgment entry in the above-styled case. As my dissent
    in Savoie v. Grange Mut. Ins. Co. (1993), 
    67 Ohio St.3d 500
    ,     N.E.2d    , stated, I do not agree with the law
    announced in the majority decision. Nevertheless, it is the
    law on the issue in the above-styled case. As I believe all
    parties should receive equal application of the law announced
    by this court, and only for that reason, I concur in the
    judgment entry.
    Wright, J., dissenting. I must dissent in continuing
    protest to the majority's sundry holdings in Savoie v. Grange
    Mut. Ins. Co. (1993), 
    67 Ohio St.3d 500
    , 
    620 N.E.2d 809
    . As
    stated in the dissent in Savoie, that holding lacks sound
    reasoning, reverses ten years of established case law and
    flaunts the will of the General Assembly. Thus, I feel
    compelled to remain in this posture until the General Assembly
    has had the opportunity to undo the damage caused to the public
    by this unfortunate, result-oriented decision.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1993-1066

Citation Numbers: 1993 Ohio 50

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 12/29/1993

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/3/2016