 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Armentrout v. Bolden6/28/2002
. Ronald, Elizabeth, and Robert Armentrout ("appellants") appeal the January 30, 2001 judgment entry by the Portage County Court of Common Pleas. The trial court granted the summary judgment motions of Westfield Insurance Company ("Westfield") and Progressive Casualty Insurance Company ("Progressive") and denied appellants' motions for summary judgment. The trial court determined that appellants were not entitled to any additional insurance coverage. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the decision of the lower court.
. On October 17, 1997, appellant Ronald was involved in an automobile accident. Appellant Ronald was operating a 1994 Toyota Corolla. Appellant Ronald sustained injuries as a result of the accident. David Lipstreu, a passenger in appellant's vehicle, also sustained injuries. Marvin Bolden ("Bolden") was alleged to have crossed the centerline while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, hitting appellant Ronald's vehicle. Bolden was operating a 1993 Ford Ranger owned by Donna Fresch ("Fresch"). While appellant Ronald was trapped in the wreckage, appellant Elizabeth, appellant Ronald's spouse, and appellant Robert, appellant Ronald's son, came to the scene of the accident.
. At the time of the accident, Fresch was covered under an automobile insurance policy with Westfield. The 1993 Ford Ranger was a covered vehicle under that policy. The policy provided liability coverage in the amount of $50,000 per person and $100,000 "per occurrence." Additionally, at the time of the accident, appellant Ronald was covered under an automobile liability policy with Progressive. The 1994 Corolla was an insured vehicle under the policy. The policy included uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage in the amount of $100,000 "per person" and $300,000 "per occurrence." The 1994 Corolla was leased from Don Joseph, Inc.
. On June 15, 1999, appellants filed a complaint against Bolden, Fresch, Westfield, and Progressive. Appellant Ronald alleged that, as a result of Bolden's negligence and/or reckless conduct, he sustained numerous injuries, loss of wages and earnings, future earnings, medical expenses, and future medical expenses. Appellants Elizabeth and Robert each alleged loss of consortium and severe emotional distress. Appellants also alleged that Fresch negligently entrusted her vehicle to Bolden. Appellants requested a declaratory judgment as to their rights under their policy with Progressive and the Westfield policies that were issued to Fresch and Don Joseph, Inc.
. In its answer to appellants' complaint, Progressive asserted a counterclaim against appellants and a cross-claim against all co-defendants for declaratory judgment.
. Westfield filed its answer to appellants' complaint and asserted a cross-claim against Bolden and Fresch and a counterclaim against appellants, requesting a declaratory judgment. Shortly thereafter, appellants filed an answer to Westfield's counterclaim, again requesting a declaratory judgment as to coverage under the policies of Fresch/Bolden and Don Joseph, Inc. Subsequently, Westfield filed an answer to Progressive's cross-claim.
. Appellants and Westfield entered into a settlement agreement. Westfield paid the "per person" liability limit of $50,000 to appellants. In return, appellants released Fresch and Bolden from all liability; however, appellants could litigate the issue of entitlement to an additional $50,000 under Fresch's policy. Westfield paid an additional $50,000 under Fresch's policy to David Lipstreu. Appellants' underinsured/uninsured motorist claims, filed under the Westfield policy that was issued to Don Joseph Inc., were rejected. Appellants also asserted a claim for unins
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|