 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
United Healthcare of Ohio v. Percival6/18/2002
after payment of court costs, attorney fees, etc., were ordered to be deposited on account for Wyatt either until he reached the age of majority or until further order of the court. Appellee did not appeal that judgment.
. On December 3, 2000, appellee commenced the action below and alleged that (1) it was subrogated to the interests of Wyatt's father; (2) Percival and Corcoran were negligent and thus responsible for Wyatt's; injuries and (3) Percival and Corcoran were liable to reimburse appellee for medical bills paid on Wyatt's behalf. Appellee demanded compensatory damages against Percival and Corcoran in the amount of $35,521.79. Percival and Corcoran denied liability and asserted a variety of affirmative defenses that included the lack of subject jurisdiction and res judicata. Blaney intervened in the action and filed her own answer and denied that appellee had any right of recovery and asserted that the whole matter was res judicata given the aforementioned judgment of the Ross County Probate Court.
. Subsequently, the parties filed extensive joint stipulations of evidence. On July 2, 2001, Blaney then filed a motion for summary judgment and argued that no genuine issues of material fact existed in this case and that judgment should be entered against appellee as a matter of law. Specifically, Blaney argued that the common pleas court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this case because probate court has exclusive jurisdiction over any issue related to a minor's personal injury claim. Blaney further argued that, jurisdiction aside, the probate court's November 30, 2000 entry conclusively determined the rights of the parties and that appellee was barred from pursuing the matter further under the doctrine of res judicata.
. Appellee filed a combined motion for summary judgment and memorandum contra to Blaney's motion and argued that no genuine issues of material fact existed regarding its subrogated interest and that it was entitled to judgment against both Percival and Corcoran to the extent of that interest. With regard to Blaney's assertion that the common pleas court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, appellee argued that the probate court's grant of exclusive jurisdiction was not as extensive as Blaney argued and did not reach the claims being asserted herein. With regard to the res judicata issue, appellee argued that the probate court did not enter a final judgment on the question of its subrogated interest and that the court contemplated further action on the issue as indicated by its February 23, 2001 judgment that impounded the settlement funds until such time as the common pleas court resolved the action.
. On September 7, 2001, the trial court issued a judgment in favor of appellee and against Percival, Corcoran and Blaney. First, the court concluded that appellee expended $35,521.79 for Wyatt's medical bills and was subrogated to the interests of his father in that amount. Second, with regard to subject matter jurisdiction, the court found that this claim is a separate subrogation claim that has nothing to do with the ward's personal injury settlement. Thus, the court concluded, the probate court did not have exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. Finally, on the res judicata issue the court found that no full adjudication of appellee's claim occurred in the probate court which thus negates operation of the doctrine. The court thus denied Blaney's motion for summary judgment and granted appellee's motion and awarded appellee $35,521.79 against Percival and Corcoran.
. Blaney filed a timely appeal and Percival and Corcoran filed a joint appeal separately. This Court consolidated those appeals and the matter is now before us
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|