 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Lippert v. Peace3/27/2001
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Civil Appeal from Common Pleas Court.
JUDGMENT: Judgment affirmed.
Plaintiffs-Appellants, Natalie L. Lippert and Bryan D. Lippert (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Appellants"), bring this appeal from a summary judgment decision in favor of Defendants- Appellees Glen L. Peace and Allstate Insurance Company (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Appellees") in the Common Pleas Court of Hancock County, Ohio. For the reasons set forth in the following opinion, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
The facts in this matter are generally undisputed. On August 26, 1996, Appellant Natalie Lippert ("Natalie") was involved in a car accident with Appellee Glen Peace ("Peace") in Hancock County, Ohio. Natalie's husband, Appellant Bryan Lippert ("Bryan"), was not present in the vehicle at the time of the accident.
Peace was insured by Progressive Insurance Company ("Progressive"), with liability limits of $12,500 "per person" and $25,000 "per accident." Appellants maintained a policy of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage through Appellee Allstate Insurance Company ("Allstate"), with liability limits of $50,000 "per person" and $100,000 "per accident." Peace was an underinsured motorist.
Allstate agreed to settle Natalie's claims under the terms of Appellants' underinsured coverage for $37,500, representing the entire "per person" limit of $50,000, which was offset by tortfeasor Peace's liability limit of $12,500 through Progressive.
Bryan sought coverage for his loss of consortium and companionship claim, alleging that the Allstate policy afforded him separate "per person" coverage up to $50,000. Both Progressive and Allstate have denied Bryan's claim, alleging that his claim is subject to the single "per person" policy limit of Natalie.
The relevant language in the Progressive policy is as follows:
The bodily injury limit for "each person" includes the aggregate of claims made for such bodily injury and claims derived from such bodily injury, including, but not limited to, loss of society, loss of companionship, loss of service, loss of consortium, and wrongful death.
The relevant language in the Allstate policy is as follows: Regardless of the number of insured autos under this coverage, the specific amount shown on the Policy Declarations for:
1. "each person" is the maximum that we will pay for damages arising out of bodily injury to one person in any one motor vehicle accident, including damages sustained by anyone else as a result of that bodily injury.
On September 25, 1998, the trial court granted Appellees' summary judgment motions, ruling that Bryan was not entitled to separate "per person" limits under the policy. This court affirmed the decision of the trial court on April 23, 1999. On June 9, 2000, the Ohio Supreme Court vacated the decision and remanded this matter to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with its decisions in Wolfe v. Wolfe (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 246, and Moore v. State Auto Mut. Ins. Co. (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 27.
The parties agreed that this matter would be resubmitted to the trial court for determination by way of motion for summary judgment. On September 29, 2000, Allstate filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted on December 1, 2000. This timely appeal followed.
Appellants present the following single assignment of error:
The trial court erred in granting summary judgment to Appellee.
In considering an appeal from a summary judgment, we review the summary judgment independently and do not give de
Page 1 2 3 4 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|