From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fisher v. Golden Rule Ins. Co

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 12, 1991
62 Ohio St. 3d 74 (Ohio 1991)

Opinion

Nos. 89-1323 and 89-1324

Submitted September 26, 1990 —

Decided June 12, 1991 — Corrected October 16, 1991.

APPEAL from and CERTIFIED by the Court of Appeals for Hancock County, No. 5-88-3.


Sua sponte, we are correcting an inadvertent omission in the syllabus and opinion of Fisher v. Golden Rule Ins. Co. found at 60 Ohio St.3d 148, 573 N.E.2d 650. The syllabus paragraph is amended by the addition of the word "within," to read as follows:

"Within two years after a policy of sickness and accident insurance is issued, an exclusionary clause for preexisting conditions may be applied to exclude a preexisting condition which is also a chronic condition or disease, even though the chronic condition or disease is not named or specifically described. (R.C. 3923.04[B], construed.)"

The penultimate paragraph of the opinion, found at 60 Ohio St. 3 d at 150, 573 N.E.2d at 652, is hereby amended by the addition of the word "within," to read as follows:

"Therefore, we hold that within two years after a policy of sickness and accident insurance is issued, an exclusionary clause for preexisting conditions may be applied to exclude a preexisting condition which is also a chronic condition or disease, even though the chronic condition or disease is not named or specifically described."

SWEENEY, Acting C.J., O'NEILL, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, H. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.

JOSEPH O'NEILL, J., of the Seventh Appellate District, sitting for MOYER, C.J.


Summaries of

Fisher v. Golden Rule Ins. Co

Supreme Court of Ohio
Jun 12, 1991
62 Ohio St. 3d 74 (Ohio 1991)
Case details for

Fisher v. Golden Rule Ins. Co

Case Details

Full title:FISHER, APPELLANT, v. GOLDEN RULE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Jun 12, 1991

Citations

62 Ohio St. 3d 74 (Ohio 1991)
578 N.E.2d 453

Citing Cases

DeMatteis v. Am. Community Mut. Ins. Co.

"III. The trial court erred as a matter of law in allowing the defendant to argue that plaintiff was not…