Title: Leisure v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as Leisure v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 89 Ohio St.3d 110, 2000-Ohio-
433.] 
 
 
 
LEISURE, ADMR., ET AL., APPELLANTS AND CROSS-APPELLEES, v. STATE FARM 
MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY; FARMERS INSURANCE OF 
COLUMBUS, INC., APPELLEE AND CROSS-APPELLANT. 
LEISURE, ADMR., ET AL., APPELLANTS AND CROSS-APPELLEES, v. STATE FARM 
MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE AND CROSS-
APPELLANT, ET AL. 
[Cite as Leisure v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 110.] 
Civil procedure — Judgments of court of appeals affirmed to the extent they 
vacated default judgments and causes remanded to trial court for further 
proceedings in accordance with R.C. 2721.12 and Cicco v. Stockmaster. 
(Nos. 98-2110 and 98-2481 — Submitted February 23, 2000 — Decided June 7, 
2000.) 
APPEAL and CROSS-APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Stark County, Nos. 
1997CA00417 and 1998CA00001. 
APPEAL and CROSS-APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Stark County, Nos. 
1997CA00420 and 1997CA00445. 
__________________ 
 
The Okey Law Firm, L.P.A., Steven P. Okey and Scott A Washam, for 
appellants and cross-appellees. 
 
Gallagher, Sharp, Fulton & Norman, D. John Travis and Gary L. 
Nicholson, for appellee and cross-appellant Farmers Insurance of Columbus, Inc. 
 
Davis & Young and Henry A. Hentemann, for appellee and cross-appellant 
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. 
 
Betty D. Montgomery, Attorney General, and Sharon A. Jennings, 
Assistant Attorney General, urging affirmance for amicus curiae Ohio Attorney 
General, in case No. 98-2110. 
 
 
2 
__________________ 
 
The court hereby, sua sponte, consolidates these two cases for disposition. 
 
The judgments of the court of appeals are affirmed to the extent they 
vacated the default judgments.  The causes are remanded to the trial court with 
instructions to permit plaintiffs to serve the Attorney General in accordance with 
R.C. 2721.12 and Cicco v. Stockmaster (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 95, 728 N.E.2d 
1066. 
 
MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., 
concur. 
 
DOUGLAS, J., concurs in judgment. 
 
PFEIFER and COOK, JJ., dissent. 
__________________ 
 
DOUGLAS, J., concurring in judgment only.  While I agree with the 
ultimate resolution, I do not subscribe to the majority’s reliance on Cicco v. 
Stockmaster (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 95, 728 N.E.2d 1066, in disposing of this 
matter.  I believe that Cicco was not properly decided and, accordingly, I continue 
to adhere to my dissent therein.