Hans v. Hartford Ins. Co. - 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

[Cite as Hans v. Hartford Ins. Co., 105 Ohio St.3d 318, 2005-Ohio-1823.]

HANS, APPELLANT, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE.
[Cite as Hans v. Hartford Ins. Co.,
105 Ohio St.3d 318, 2005-Ohio-1823.]
Motor vehicles -- Uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage -- Court of
appeals' judgment reversed on the authority of Gilchrist v. Gonsor, and
cause remanded.
(No. 2003-1271 -- Submitted March 30, 2005 -- Decided May 4, 2005.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County,
No. C-020500, 2003-Ohio-3045.
__________________
{¶1} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of
Gilchrist v. Gonsor, 104 Ohio St.3d 599, 2004-Ohio-7103, 821 N.E.2d 154, and
the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent
with Gilchrist v. Gonsor, Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-
Ohio-5849, 797 N.E.2d 1256, or Hopkins v. Dyer, 104 Ohio St.3d 461, 2004-
Ohio-6769, 820 N.E.2d 329.

MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, PFEIFER, O'CONNOR and O'DONNELL, JJ., concur.

LUNDBERG STRATTON and LANZINGER, JJ., dissent.
__________________

LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissenting.
{¶2} For reasons set forth in my dissenting opinion in Gilchrist v. Gonsor, 104
Ohio St.3d 599, 2004-Ohio-7103, 821 N.E.2d 154, ¶ 14-23, I respectfully dissent from
the majority's decision to reverse this matter.
{¶3} However, given that the majority is reversing the judgment of the court of
appeals, it is appropriate to remand the cause to the trial court for additional proceedings
not inconsistent with Westfield Ins. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-Ohio-5849, 797

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
N.E.2d 1256, and Hopkins v. Dyer, 104 Ohio St.3d 461, 2004-Ohio-6769, 820 N.E.2d
329.

LANZINGER, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.
__________________

Butkovich, Schimpf, Schimpf & Ginocchio Co., L.P.A., Laura I. Murphy,
and Julie Schimpf Kehres, for appellant.

Thompson Hine, L.L.P., Jane E. Garfinkel, and John T. Sunderland, for
appellee.
______________________
2