Kaplysh v. Takieddine (35 Ohio St. 3d 170, 1988)

Locher, J.

The primary issues presented in this action are (1) whether Haifa Takieddine was a qualified licensed driver at the time of the accident and (2) whether the court of appeals erred in dismissing State Farm’s cross-appeal. We hold in the negative on both issues and, accordingly, affirm the decision of the court of appeals.

As observed above, paragraph two of page two of the rental agreement states:

“Under no circumstances shall vehicle be used, operated or driven * * * (F) by any person except Renter, or a qualified licensed driver provided Renter’s permission be first obtained.” (Emphasis added.)

This paragraph serves as an exclusion to relieve Agency from its obligations to indemnify authorized operators pursuant to paragraph four of page two of the rental agreement. There is no dispute as to whether Haifa Takieddine had Rafik’s permission to drive the vehicle at the time of the accident. Therefore, the ultimate query becomes whether Haifa Takieddine, as a driver with an expired driver’s license, was a “qualified licensed driver,” as the term is utilized in the rental agreement.

Appellant State Farm contends that the term “qualified licensed driver” was used in the rental agreement only to prevent the renter from allowing the automobile to be driven by one who had never been licensed or whose license ha