Opinion · Ohio Supreme Court
Pillo v. Stricklin
98 Ohio St. 3d 163
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Ohio Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- Ohio
- Date
- 2002-12-24
- Topic
- general
{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority of Kemper v. Michigan Millers Mut Ins. Co., 98 Ohio St.3d 162, 2002-Ohio-7101, 781 N.E.2d 196, decided today. Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Pillo v. Stricklin. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 3 opinions
[Cite as Pillo v. Stricklin,98 Ohio St.3d 163
,2002-Ohio-7090
.]
PILLO ET AL., APPELLEES, v. STRICKLIN ET AL.; PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE
COMPANY, APPELLANT.
[Cite as Pillo v. Stricklin, 98 Ohio St.3d 163
,2002-Ohio-7090
.]
Insurance — Motor vehicles — Uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage —
Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on authority of Kemper v. Michigan
Millers Mut. Ins. Co.
(No. 2002-0291 — Submitted December 18, 2002 — Decided December 24,
2002.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Stark County, No. 2001CA00204, 2002-
Ohio-7049.
__________________
{¶1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority
of Kemper v. Michigan Millers Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Ohio St.3d 162
, 2002-Ohio- 7101,781 N.E.2d 196
, decided today.
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and PFEIFER, JJ., concur.
COOK, J. dissents.
LUNDBERG STRATTON, J., dissents for the reasons stated in the Chief
Justice’s dissenting opinion in Kemper v. Michigan Millers Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Ohio St.3d 162
,2002-Ohio-7101
,781 N.E.2d 196
.
__________________
Tzangas, Plakas, Mannos & Recupero, David L. Dingwell and Denise K.
Houston, for appellees.
Davis & Young, Henry A. Hentemann and J. Michael Creagan, for
appellant Progressive Insurance Company.
__________________