 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Steinbach v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company5/22/2000
JUDGMENT: Affirmed
Plaintiffs-appellants James R. Steinbach and Pamela M. Steinbach (hereinafter collectively, "the Steinbachs", and individually, "James Steinbach" and "Pamela Steinbach") appeal the April 1, 1999 Memorandum of Decision and May 4, 1999 Judgment Entry entered by the Licking County Court of Common Pleas, granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (hereinafter "State Farm") and denying the Steinbachs' request for declaratory judgment.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE
On March 27, 1997, Pamela Steinbach was seriously injured after being struck by a motor vehicle operated by Travis Leach. At the time of the accident, Pamela Steinbach was a pedestrian traversing across North Liberty Street in Powell, Ohio, via the crosswalk. Western Reserve Mutual Casualty Company, Leach's liability carrier, paid the "per person" limits of his policy, which totaled $100,000, to the Steinbachs. State Farm, the Steinbachs' liability carrier, had knowledge of this settlement and consented thereto. Pamela and James Steinbach were individually insured under two policies with State Farm. Each policy provided uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage with limits of $100,000 per each person and $300,000 per each accident. After Western Reserve tendered Leach's liability limits, the Steinbachs made timely demands on State Farm for uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage under these two policies.
State Farm denied the claims. Consequently, on July 7, 1998, the Steinbachs filed a complaint in the Licking County Court of Common Pleas, seeking declaratory judgment. On January 15, 1999, the Steinbachs filed a Brief in Support of their complaint. State Farm filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on February 19, 1999. Via Memorandum of Decision dated April 1, 1999, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of State Farm and denied the Steinbachs' request for declaratory judgment. The trial court filed a Judgment Entry on May 4, 1999. It is from the April 1, 1999 Memorandum of Decision and May 4, 1999 Judgment Entry the Steinbachs appeal, raising the following assignment of error:
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN GRANTING APPELLEE DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AND ERRED IN DISMISSING APPELLANTS' COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT. SEE, MEMORANDUM OF DECISION, FILED APRIL 1, 1999.
I.
Herein, the Steinbachs maintain the trial court erred in granting declaratory judgment in favor of State Farm and denying their request for the same. The Steinbachs support their argument as follows: Pamela and James Are Entitled To $100,000 From State Farm In Uninsured/underinsured Motorist Coverage Without "Combining" Coverage.
Pamela And James Are Entitled To Receive $100,000 From State Farm In Uninsured/Underinsured Motorists Coverage Without Such Coverage Being "Excess Coverage."
Pamela And James Are Entitled To Receive $100,000 From State Farm In Uninsured/Underinsured Motorists Coverage Without "Stacking Coverage."
State Farm Has Failed To Include Effective Anti-Stacking Language In Its Policies, Entitling Pamela And James To Coverage Up To $200,000 Each.
State Farm Must Provide Up To $100,000 In Underinsured Motorist Coverage To Pamela And James.
At The Very Least, State Farm Must Provide Underinsured Motorists Coverage To Pamela.
These assertions focus on three primary issues which must be addressed in resolving this appeal. First, we must determine whether the Steinbachs' individual claims are a "single claim" for purposes of determining the available limits of coverage. Second, we must determine whether State Farm
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.
|
|