Full text of the Court's opinion

In a 7-0 decision, the Ohio Supreme Court in Hudson v. Petrosurance, Inc., Slip Opinion No. 2010-Ohio-4505, held that the Ohio's Liquidation Act does not authorize the Superintendent of Insurance to pay interest to an insurer’s creditors and other preferred claimants on allowed claims before paying the funds remaining in the insolvent estate to the insurer's shareholders.

Legislation intended to address additional issues related Ohio’s asbestos litigation system was defeated by the Ohio House by a vote of 48-45. Senate Bill 370 House Bill 631 would have discourage “double dipping” by plaintiffs who file lawsuits in Ohio courts while making the same claims against bankruptcy trusts set up by federal bankruptcy courts.

The revisions to Ohio’s exemption law set forth in O.R.C. §2329.66 become effective on September 25, 2008 by Senate Bill 281 that was signed by Governor Strickland on June 27, 2008. The purpose of the changes to Ohio’s exemption law is to increase the exemptions for property that a debtor may hold exempt from execution, garnishment or sale for the satisfaction of a judgment. Ohio’s current exemptions have not been revised since 1979, and the current exemptions do not reflect the costs of living in 2008.

On July 17, 2008, in Phar-Mor, Inc. v. McKesson Corp. (Nos 05-4525/4526), the Sixth Circuit affirmed the Northern District of Ohio's ruling that a vendor's administrative expense priority on its reclamation claim survives, even after the goods that are subject to reclamation are sold and the proceeds are used to satisfy a secured creditor's superior claim. Full text of the opinion.

Facts