Smith v. McDiarmid

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 2151

Syllabus

Trial court did not err by granting summary judgment on breach of contract claim because vehicle service contract expressly excluded modified vehicles and it was undisputed that vehicle was modified. Trial court erred by concluding as a matter of law that used car dealers were not agents of vehicle service contract administrator based on apparent authority when there were genuine issues of material fact about used car dealers' role in process of selling vehicle service contract. Trial court did not err by granting summary judgment on misrepresentation and Consumer Sales Practices Act against entity named as insurer of vehicle service contract but erred by granting summary judgment on those claims against vehicle service contract administrator because trial court failed to consider whether vehicle service contract administrator could be liable for dealers' acts or misrepresentations based on agency relationship.