Eastlawn Properties, L.L.C. v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co.

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 1475

Syllabus

INSURANCE — SUMMARY JUDGMENT — LIMITATIONS PERIOD — CONTRACTS — WAIVER— BAD FAITH — BREACH OF CONTRACT — PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL — NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION — FRAUD — MOTION TO DISMISS — EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL: Where insured's claim for breach of contract was barred by the two-year suit-limitation period in the insurance policy, and where insurer did not waive the limitation provision, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to insurer on the claim. The trial court erred in granting summary judgment to insurer on insured's claim for bad faith in the handling and processing of insured's claim under the policy where the record contained genuine issues of material fact as to whether there was a reasonable justification for the insurer's repeated failure to respond to the insured, its delay in issuing payment, and its request for additional documentation regarding code upgrades to the insured property. The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to insurer on insured's claim that insurer had breached the contract it had with insured's restoration company where the record established that no contract was formed between insurer and the restoration company. Where insurer never promised to pay insured's restoration company a specific amount for supplemental repairs, the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to insurer on the claim for promissory estoppel. The trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to insurer on claims for negligent misrepresentation and fraud where insurer did not provide false and misleading information or omit any material facts that insured relied on and that resulted in injury or pecuniary loss to insured. Because the doctrines of waiver and estoppel are not available to extend the terms of an insurance policy, the trial court did not err in dismissing insured's claim for estoppel/waiver of the insurance policy's code upgrade coverage limitation.