Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. CPS Holdings, Inc

In Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. CPS Holdings, Inc., 115 Ohio St.3d 306, 2007 Ohio 4917 at P7, 875 N.E.2d 31, the Supreme Court of Ohio reiterated a number of contract principles applicable to insurance policies. When confronted with an issue of contractual interpretation, the role of a court is to give effect to the intent of the parties to the agreement. Id. Courts examine the insurance contract as a whole and presume that the intent of the parties is reflected in the language used in the policy. Id. Courts look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the policy unless another meaning is clearly apparent from the contents of the policy. Id. When the language of a written contract is clear, a court may look no further than the writing itself to find the intent of the parties. Id.