Dieringer v. Sawmiller
2012 Ohio 4880
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Dieringers insured with Motorists Mutual; policy includes medical payments and uninsured motorist coverage.
- September 8, 2010, Sawmiller (a minor) struck Nancy Hertenstein; Sandra Dieringer witnessed the accident and suffered emotional distress.
- Sandra seeks coverage for PTSD-related injuries under the policy’s bodily-injury provisions; Motorists Mutual moves for summary judgment claiming no bodily injury.
- Dr. Steinberg, after evaluation, opines Sandra has PTSD; argues PTSD causes physical injury to brain, potentially covered by the policy.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for Motorists Mutual, citing Ohio law excluding PTSD/emotional distress from bodily-injury coverage.
- Appeal affirmed; court held Sandra did not show a bodily injury under policy definitions and evidence did not establish intra-policy physical injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PTSD constitutes bodily injury under the policy | Dieringers contend PTSD causes physical injury covered by policy. | Motorists Mutual argues bodily injury excludes emotional/mental distress like PTSD. | PTSD not a bodily injury under the policy; no coverage for Sandra. |
Key Cases Cited
- Erie Ins. Co. v. Favor, 129 Ohio App.3d 644 (10th Dist. 1998) (PTSD-related emotional injuries not bodily injuries under auto policy)
- Yeager v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co., 166 Ohio St. 71 (1956) (contract interpretation of insurance policies)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (summary-judgment burden of production standard)
- Murphy v. Reynoldsburg, 65 Ohio St.3d 356 (1992) (summary-judgment standard and construction against movant)
- Hillyer v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 131 Ohio App.3d 172 (8th Dist. 1999) (clarifies summary-judgment and evidence weighing)