TMM Investments, Limited v. Ohio Casualty Insuranc

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “that minor mistakes that do not taint the entire award should not frustrate the parties’ intent to be bound by the appraisal provision of their contract”
• reversing an order setting aside the appraisal award because, under Johnson, it was entirely appropriate for the appraisers to consider whether damage was caused by pre-existing conditions, as they did
• finding persuasive “the closeness of the facts in Johnson to those at bar—both involved roofs damaged in part by hailstorms,” and reasoning that such fact “militate[d] in favor of arriving at a holding similar to the one arrived at by the Johnson court”
• finding persuasive “the closeness of the facts in Johnson to those at bar—both involved roofs damaged in part by hailstorms,” and reasoning that such a fact “militate[d] in favor of arriving at a holding similar to the one arrived at by the Johnson court”
• “To the extent the appraisers merely distinguished damage caused by pre-existing conditions from damage caused by the storm, they were acting within their authority”
• “minor mistakes that do not taint the entire award should not frustrate the parties’ intent to be bound by the appraisal provision of their contract”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).