(A) As used in this section, "policy" includes an endorsement.
(B) No policy of automobile or motor vehicle insurance that is covered by sections 3937.01 to 3937.17 of the Revised Code, including, but not limited to, the uninsured motorist coverage, underinsured motorist coverage, or both uninsured and underinsured motorist coverages included in such a policy as authorized by section 3937.18 of the Revised Code, and that is issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in this state, and no other policy of casualty or liability insurance that is covered by sections 3937.01 to 3937.17 of the Revised Code and that is so issued, shall provide coverage for judgments or claims against an insured for punitive or exemplary damages.
(C) This section applies only to policies of automobile, motor vehicle, or other casualty or liability insurance as described in division (B) of this section that are issued or renewed on or after the effective date of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1987–2019 · leading case: Neal-Pettit v. Lahman, 2010-Ohio-1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327.
Neal-Pettit v. Lahman, 2010-Ohio-1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327. · cites it 6דIn addition, R.C. 3937.182(B) prohibits insurance coverage of punitive damages: “No policy of automobile or motor vehicle penalty.”
Corinthian v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 758 N.E.2d 218 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 2001). · cites it 11ד” The statute provides no definition of these terms, however, as appellees conceded in their motion for summary judgment in the lower court. Thus, there is no indication in the statute that it applies to professional health care facility liability insurance such as the policy at…”
Fairfield Ins. Co. v. Stephens Martin Paving, LP, 246 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. 2008). “Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 3937.182(B) (2008) (prohibiting coverage for punitive and exemplary damages in automobile policies and certain types of casualty and liability policies); Utah Code Ann.”
Casey v. Calhoun, 531 N.E.2d 1348 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1987). · cites it 2דContained within its provisions is R.C. 3937.182 (B), which again incorporates the prohibition against punitive damages in uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage as previously expressed in R.”
Stickovich v. City of Cleveland, 757 N.E.2d 50 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 2001). “, R.C. 3937.182 (prohibiting coverage for punitive or exemplary damages).”
State Farm Mut. Ins. v. Blevins, 551 N.E.2d 955 (Ohio 1990). “18(1) with R.C. 3937.182 (B), which provides: “No policy of automobile or motor vehicle insurance that is covered by sections 3937.”
Parker Hannifin Corp. v. Stand. Motor Prods., No. 1:19-cv-00617, 2019 WL 5425242 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 23, 2019). · cites it 2ד”) “The public policy prohibiting the protection of insurance for punitive damages stems from the underlying assumptions that an individual should 18 In addition, Ohio Rev. Code § 3937.182 provides that: “No policy of automobile or motor vehicle insurance that is covered by…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 3937.182(B): 6 cases
Neal-Pettit v. Lahman, 2010-Ohio-1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327. “In addition, R.C. 3937.182(B) prohibits insurance coverage of punitive damages: “No policy of automobile or motor vehicle penalty.”
Fairfield Ins. Co. v. Stephens Martin Paving, LP, 246 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. 2008). “Ohio Rev.Code Ann. § 3937.182(B) (2008) (prohibiting coverage for punitive and exemplary damages in automobile policies and certain types of casualty and liability policies); Utah Code Ann.”
Corinthian v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 758 N.E.2d 218 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 2001). “” The statute provides no definition of these terms, however, as appellees conceded in their motion for summary judgment in the lower court. Thus, there is no indication in the statute that it applies to professional health care facility liability insurance such as the policy at…”
Casey v. Calhoun, 531 N.E.2d 1348 (Ohio Ct. App. 8th Dist. 1987). “Contained within its provisions is R.C. 3937.182 (B), which again incorporates the prohibition against punitive damages in uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage as previously expressed in R.”
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.