In re Residence-Employee Exception in Homeowner's Insurance Policy Cases , 98 Ohio St. 3d 119 ( 2002 )

{¶ 1} The following dispositions of currently pending appeals are hereby entered based on our decision in Hillyer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 97 Ohio St.3d 411, 2002-Ohio-6662, 780 N.E.2d 262.

I

{¶ 2} The judgments of the courts of appeals in the following cases are affirmed:

{¶ 3} 2001-2090. Grabowski v. Natl. Fire Ins. Co. (Nov. 1, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 78712, 2001 WL 1398449.

{¶ 4} 2001-2155. Bergstrom v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (Dec. 6, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 79775, 2001 WL 1557518.

{¶ 5} 2001-2257. Haberley v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. (Dec. 13, 2001), Cuyahoga App. No. 80006, 2001 WL 1609025.

{¶ 6} 2002-0223 and 2002-0352. Vohsing v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. (Jan. 14, 2002), Licking App. No. 01-CA-56, 2002 WL 54650.

{¶ 7} 2002-0369. Trussell v. United Ohio Ins. Co. (Jan. 16, 2002), Perry App. No. 01-CA-15, 2002 WL 91887.

{¶ 8} 2002-0505. Mattox v. Allstate Ins. Co. (Mar. 25, 2002), Stark App. No. 2001CA218, 2002 WL 465276.

{¶ 9} 2002-0597. Westmark v. Farmers Ins. of Columbus, Inc. (Mar. 29, 2002), Fulton App. No. F-01-018, 2002 WL 479831.

{¶ 10} 2002-0666. Ruiz v. Rygalski (Mar. 29, 2002), Lucas App. No. L-01-1363, 2002 WL 471707.

{¶ 11} 2002-0947 and 2002-0987. Cox v. Nationwide Ins. Co., Richland App. No. 01CA97, 2002-Ohio-2524, 2002 WL 987304.

{¶ 12} 2002-1079 and 2002-1109. Ramsey v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., Licking App. No. 2001CA00124, 2002-Ohio-2547, 2002 WL 1270897.

{¶ 13} 2002-1140. Stevens v. Allstate Ins. Co., Lucas App. No. L-02-1003, 2002-Ohio-3044, 2002 WL 1371034.

{¶ 14} 2002-1299. Sowards v. W. Res. Mut. Cas. Co., Pike App. No. 01CA675, 2002-Ohio-4409, 2002 WL 1972960.

{¶ 15} 2002-1400. Gass v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., Lucas App. No. L-02-1032, 2002-Ohio-3966, 2002 WL 1787969.

{¶ 16} 2002-1518. Maye v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., Lucas App. No. L-01-1418, 2002-Ohio-3572, 2002 WL 1565510.

II

{¶ 17} The judgment of the court of appeals in the following case is reversed, and the judgment of the trial court is reinstated on the authority of Hillyer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., supra:

{¶ 18} 2002-0954. Allen v. Nationwide Ins. Co., Franklin App. No. 01AP-909, 2002-Ohio-2013, 2002 WL 723497.

Ill

{¶ 19} In the following cases, the discretionary appeals are allowed, and the judgments of the courts of appeals are affirmed:

{¶ 20} 2002-1522. Wetterau v. Utica Natl. Ins. Group, Summit App. No. 20978, 2002-Ohio-3752, 2002 WL 31954598.

{¶ 21} 2002-1610. Combs v. Combs, Meigs App. No. 02CA3, 2002-Ohio-4099, 2002 WL 1824971.

IV

{¶ 22} In the following cases, the discretionary appeals are allowed, the court finds that a conflict exists on the certified questions, and the judgments of the courts of appeals are affirmed on the authority of Hillyer v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., supra:

{¶ 23} 2002-1438 and 2002-1703. Boughan v. Grange Mut. Ins. Co., Allen App. No. 1-02-16, 2002-Ohio-3393, 2002 WL 1433857.

{¶ 24} 2002-1570 and 2002-1682. Zabukovec v. GRE Ins. Group, Lake App. No. 2001-L-096, 2002-Ohio-4365, 2002 WL 1964777.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.