Case ID: ohio-st-3d_85/html/1482-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

99-618.
    Holcomb v. State Farm Ins. Cos.
   Franklin App. No. 98AP-353. This cause is pending before the court on the certification of conflict by the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. On review of the order certifying a conflict,

IT IS DETERMINED by the court that a conflict exists and it is ordered by the court that the parties brief the issue stated in the court of appeals’ journal entry filed March 8, 1999, as follows: “ * * * [Djefendant’s motion to certify the judgment of this court relative to plaintiffs’ fifth assignment of error as being in conflict with the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County in Kocel v. Farmers Ins. [of Columbus, Inc.] (Mar. 7, 1996), Cuyahoga App. No. [69058], unreported [1996 WL 100943, discretionary appeal allowed in (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 1495, 670 N.E.2d 242, appeal dismissed as having been improvidently allowed in (1997), 79 Ohio St.3d 1235, 684 N.E.2d 83], and Wilson v. Nationwide Ins. Co. (Nov. 20, 1997), Cuyahoga App. No. 71734, unreported [1997 WL 723419], is sustained and, pursuant to Section 3(B)(4), Article IV, Ohio Constitution, the record of this case is certified to the Supreme Court of Ohio for review and final determination upon the following issue in conflict:

“Whether R.C. 3937.18(A)(2), as amended by Am.Sub.S.B. 20, legislatively overrules Sexton v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. (1982), 69 Ohio St.3d 431 [23 O.O.3d 385, 433 N.E.2d 555], and now allows an automobile insurance policy to limit recovery of underinsured motorist benefits to cases in which an insured has suffered physical injury, sickness, or disease, including death.”

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court that the Clerk shall issue an order for the transmittal of the record from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court, sua sponte, that this cause be consolidated with Supreme Court case Nos. 99-342 and 99-348, Holcomb et al. v. State Farm Ins. Cos.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall combine the briefing of case Nos. 99-342, 99-348, and 99-618 and follow the provisions of S.Ct.Prae.R. VI(4). Martin Holcomb et al., appellants in case No. 99-342, shall proceed as appellants/cross-appellees and State Farm Insurance Companies, appellant in case No. 99-348, shall proceed as appellee/cross-appellant. The parties shall file one brief for each brief permitted under S.Ct.Prae.R. VI(4); the parties shall file an original of the brief in each case and eighteen copies of the brief; and the parties shall otherwise comply with the requirements of S.Ct.Prae.R. VI.