 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Burden v. Hall3/20/2003
. Plaintiffs-appellants, Maurice and Florence Fuerst, appeal from the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment for defendant-appellee, United Ohio Insurance Company. For the following reasons, we affirm.
. On January 10, 1999, Mandy Shoup was fatally injured in a vehicular accident. At the time of the accident, Ms. Shoup's maternal grandparents, appellants Maurice and Florence Fuerst, were insured under a homeowner's policy issued by appellee. On January 10, 2001, appellants joined a lawsuit asserting negligence against the alleged tortfeasor and demanding uninsured motorist coverage from a number of insurers, including appellee.
. On June 15, 2001, appellee moved for summary judgment against appellants, arguing that appellants were not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage pursuant to their homeowner's policy. After determining that R.C. 3937.18, as amended by H.B. No. 261, controlled, the trial court concluded that the homeowner's policy was not an "automobile liability or motor vehicle liability policy of insurance" and, thus, uninsured motorist coverage did not arise by operation of law. Accordingly, the trial court granted appellee's summary judgment motion. Appellants then filed this appeal.
. Although this appeal was originally filed against appellees, United Ohio Insurance Company, Republic Franklin Insurance Company, and Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, appellants, Edward and Kathleen Burden, voluntarily dismissed their claims against Republic Franklin Insurance Company and Fireman's Fund Insurance Company during the pendency of the appeal.
. On appeal, appellants assign the following errors:
. "[1.] The trial court erred in finding that the commercial general liability policy issued by Defendant Republic Franklin Insurance Company did not provide uninsured motorist coverage.
. "[2.] The trial court erred in finding that the business auto policy issued by Defendant Republic Franklin Insurance Company did not provide uninsured motorist coverage.
. "[3.] The trial court erred in finding that the homeowner's policy issued by Defendant United Ohio Insurance Company, a/k/a Ohio Mutual Insurance Group did not provide uninsured motorist coverage."
. Appellate review of summary judgment motions is de novo. Helton v. Scioto Cty. Bd. of Commrs. (1997), 123 Ohio App.3d 158, 162. "When reviewing a trial court's ruling on summary judgment, the court of appeals conducts an independent review of the record and stands in the shoes of the trial court." Mergenthal v. Star Banc Corp. (1997), 122 Ohio App.3d 100, 103. Civ.R. 56(C) provides that summary judgment may be granted when the moving party demonstrates that: (1) there is no genuine issue of material fact; (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (3) reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the party against whom the motion for summary judgment is made. State ex rel. Grady v. State Emp. Relations Bd. (1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 181, 183.
. As appellants Edward and Kathleen Burden have voluntarily dismissed their claims against appellee Republic Franklin Insurance Company, only appellants' third assignment of error remains pending. By appellants' third assignment of error, they argue that their homeowner's policy is an "automobile liability or motor vehicle liability policy of insurance," as defined in R.C. 3937.18(L). Appellants further argue that, because appellee failed to offer uninsured motorist coverage as part of the instant policy, that coverage arises by operation of law. Therefore, appellants conclude that they are ent
Page 1 2 3 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|