2/27/1996 Case Announcements - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

COLUMBUS

ANNOUNCEMENT

TUESDAY

February 27, 1996

MERIT DOCKET

96-9. Duryee v. Am. Druggists' Ins. Co.
This cause originated in this court on the filing of a complaint pursuant to
Section 3 of Sub.H.B. No. 374. It was dismissed sua sponte on January 24, 1996.
On consideration of relator's motion to vacate or to reconsider or clarify the
order of dismissal,

IT IS ORDERED that relator's motion to vacate or to reconsider the order
of dismissal is denied.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that relator's motion for clarification of the order
of dismissal is granted.

Section 3 of Sub.H.B. No. 374 provides that "[a]ny action challenging the
validity of Section 3903.42 of the Revised Code, as amended by this act, or the
application of the provisions of that section to a claim filed in a liquidation
proceeding, shall be brought exclusively in the Supreme Court of Ohio."
However, relator is not challenging the amended statute or application of its
provisions to the pending liquidation proceedings. Instead, relator desires
court approval to apply the amended statute. In the absence of any challenge,
R.C. 3903.42, as amended, does not
require action by this court prior to application of the statute to pending
liquidation proceedings. Therefore, Section 3 does not vest the court with
jurisdiction over relator's mandamus action. Based on the foregoing, relator's
cause was dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer and Cook,
JJ., concur.

2