You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Ackerman v. Fortis Benefits Ins.

Citations: 124 Ohio St. 3d 1434; 920 N.E.2d 366Docket: 2009-1794

Court: Ohio Supreme Court; January 21, 2010; Ohio; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Montgomery App. No. 23443 involves an appeal currently pending before the court from the Court of Appeals for Montgomery County. The court has granted the appellants' motion for redaction. The appellant is required to visit the Supreme Court of Ohio Clerk’s office to redact all personal identifiers as defined by Rule 44(H) of the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio. This redaction must be completed within ten days from the date of this entry.

Legal Issues Addressed

Redaction of Personal Identifiers under Rule 44(H)

Application: The court requires the appellant to redact personal identifiers in compliance with Rule 44(H) of the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio.

Reasoning: The appellant is required to visit the Supreme Court of Ohio Clerk’s office to redact all personal identifiers as defined by Rule 44(H) of the Rules of Superintendence for the Courts of Ohio.

Timeliness of Compliance with Court Orders

Application: The appellant must complete the redaction of personal identifiers within a specific timeframe set by the court.

Reasoning: This redaction must be completed within ten days from the date of this entry.