Ohayon v. Safeco, 91 Ohio St.3d 474, 2001-Ohio-100, 747 N.E.2d 206 — Ohio's leading case on conflicts of law for uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage
In re Uninsured & Underinsured Motorist Coverage Cases (Nationwide Agribusiness Ins. Co. v. Wagner and Vicars v. McCray), 100 Ohio St.3d 302, 2003-Ohio-5888, 798 N.E.2d 1077 — Adam E. Carr represented the successful insurers in two of the companion cases to Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-Ohio-5849, 799 N.E.2d 179. The Supreme Court of Ohio adopted one of Adam E. Carr's arguments on insurance policy interpretation. It was Galatis that ended the Scott-Pontzer phenomenon, which had driven some leading insurers out of the Ohio insurance market.
Cappara v. Schibley, 85 Ohio St.3d 403, 1999-Ohio-278, 709 N.E.2d 117 — Ohio law allows a person injured by a drunk driver to recover punitive damages from the drunk driver. In Cappara v. Schibley, 85 Ohio St.3d 403, 1999-Ohio-278, 709 N.E.2d 117, the trial court improperly allowed evidence of prior convictions to establish a pattern. Adam E. Carr wrote the winning briefs in Ohio's Eighth District Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court of Ohio. Both appellate courts held that subsequent bad acts are not admissible to show malice at the time in question.
Barker v. Emergency Professional Serv., Inc. 11th Dist. No. 2012-T-0098, 2013-Ohio-5819 — Plaintiff had been transported to a local hospital following a near-drowning diving accident. He alleged that substandard medical care rendered him a quadriplegic/tetraplegic.
Some of the medical defendants asserted a third-party complaint for contribution and indemnity against the property owners for the original injury, based on an alleged defect in the condition of the property. Adam E. Carr successfully moved for a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal in the trial court and successfully defended the appeal.
No case has been found in American legal history in which a medical malpractice defendant was permitted to assert such a claim against the original tortfeasor. The treating doctor "takes his victim as he finds him," and is responsible for the consequences of his or her own malpractice, if any. The treating doctor is not responsible for the original injury, but only to the extent, if any, that his substandard care made the injury worse. This fundamental principle of tort law was affirmed.
D.G. v. Boardman Local Schools, N.D.Ohio No. 4:11-cv-01174 — Adam E. Carr successfully defended a pre-teen girl and her parents in federal court. Our clients had been accused of bullying at school and cyberbullying on the internet.
The plaintiff filed suit against our clients, plus ten other children, their parents, and the school district. The allegations against our clients were dismissed with prejudice during discovery, with no payment by our clients or their insurer.
The plaintiff and her mother appeared on two national tv shows: a 48 Hours special on school bullying, and the Dr. Phil show (which was aired twice). None of the defendants was interviewed on either program. Despite this, our clients prevailed in court.