Baker v. Goldblatt

1 Citing case

  1. Sorrell v. Thevenir

    69 Ohio St. 3d 415 (Ohio 1994)   Cited 140 times
    In Sorrell v. Thevenir (1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 415, 633 N.E.2d 504, we reiterated that "'[t]he right to a jury trial does not involve merely a question of procedure.

    "(2) To any medical claim, as defined in section 2305.11 of the Revised Code." One commentator noted that another purpose of the Act is to prevent double recoveries in tort actions. Darling, Ohio Civil Justice Reform Act (1987) 130-131; see, also, Note, The Constitutionality of Offsetting Collateral Benefits Under Ohio Revised Code Section 2317.45 (1992), 53 Ohio St.L.J. 587; Baker v. Goldblatt (C.A. 6, 1992), 955 F.2d 402, 407. However, opponents of the Act, including the Ohio Public Interest Campaign, claimed that the insurance industry had contrived an insurance crisis in order to promote and protect "organized price gouging" by insurance underwriters.