Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 3903
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 3903.37 (2026)

Contingent claims- absolute claims

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
March 7, 1983
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 830 - 114th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

(A) The claim of a third party which is contingent only on his first obtaining a judgment against the insured shall be considered and allowed as if there were no such contingency.

(B) A claim may be allowed even if contingent, if it is filed in accordance with section 3903.35 of the Revised Code. It may be allowed and may participate in all distributions declared after it is filed to the extent that it does not prejudice the orderly administration of the liquidation.

(C) Claims that are due except for the passage of time shall be treated as absolute claims are treated, except that such claims may be discounted at the legal rate of interest.

(D) Claims made under employment contracts by directors, principal officers, or persons in fact performing similar functions or having similar powers are limited to payment for services rendered prior to the issuance of any order of rehabilitation or liquidation under section 3903.13 or 3903.18 of the Revised Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1987–1987 · leading case: State v. Ramos, 534 N.E.2d 885 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Ramos, 534 N.E.2d 885 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1987). “27-9-3-35(a); accord R.C. 3903.37(A). *90 In discussing the doctrine of “comity,” one court has noted: “There is a doctrine known and established as that of comity.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3903.37(A): 1 case
State v. Ramos, 534 N.E.2d 885 (Ohio Ct. App. 3d Dist. 1987). “27-9-3-35(a); accord R.C. 3903.37(A). *90 In discussing the doctrine of “comity,” one court has noted: “There is a doctrine known and established as that of comity.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.