[Cite as Ackerman v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2004-Ohio-7289.]
IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO
DEBRA ACKERMAN, et al.
:
Plaintiffs
:
v.
:
CASE NO. 2004-08022-AD
:
MEMORANDUM DECISION
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
:
Defendant
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
{¶ 1} On July 13, 2004, at approximately 8:00 p.m., plaintiff,
Justin Ackerman, was traveling south on Interstate 275 between the
State Route 125 and the Five Mile Road exits near an overpass area,
when his automobile struck an area of the roadway where the
pavement had buckled.
highway blow up.
The buckled pavement area was caused by a
The automobile received body damage from striking
the pavement blow up.
Automotive repair costs in the amount of
$200.00 were paid by plaintiff, Debra Ackerman, Justin Ackerman’s
mother.
Plaintiffs have asserted the damage to Justin Ackerman’s
vehicle
was
defendant,
proximately
Department
Interstate 275.
caused
of
by
negligence
Transportation
on
(DOT),
in
the
part
of
maintaining
Plaintiffs related they were informed by DOT
personnel that the roadway pavement essentially “exploded” due to
hot and humid weather conditions.
Consequently, plaintiffs filed
this complaint seeking to recover $200.00, the cost of automotive
repair needed resulting rom the July 13, 2004, incident.
requisite
material
filing
fee
was
paid
by
plaintiff,
The
Debra
Ackerman.
{¶ 2} Defendant acknowledged Justin Ackerman damaged his vehicle
when he drove over a roadway pavement blow up on Interstate 275 at
milemarker 67.40 in Clermont County or milemarker 35.97 in Hamilton
County.
However, defendant denied any liability in this matter
based on the assertion DOT did not have any notice of the pavement
blow up prior to the July 13, 2004, incident forming the basis of
this claim.
Defendant pointed out the initial criterion for a
liability determination in a highway blow up claim is establishing
DOT’s notice of the defective condition (blow up), see Knickel v.
Ohio Dept. of Transportation (1976), 49 Ohio App. 2d 335, (general
not
specific
particular
notice
that
a
deteriorated
roadway
condition is likely to occur is the standard for a liability
judgment).
highway
Defendant also pointed out generalized notice of a
blow
up
and
resulting
liability
are
shown
under
circumstances, “where temperatures are extremely hot for extended
lengths of time.”
95-10297-AD.
Allen v. Department of Transportation (1996),
The likelihood of a blow up occurrence may be
substantiated by providing evidence of extreme weather conditions,
Allen, id.
However, weather evidence is not essential to a
liability determination in an action for property damage caused by
a highway blow up.
The temperature at the time of the highway blow
up incident in Allen was approximately 89°F to 90°F.
The maximum
relative humidity from July 1 to July 13, 2004, ranged from 90% to
100%.
{¶ 3} Defendant reiterated it did not have actual notice of the
highway blow up prior to July 13, 2004.
any
calls
or
complaints
about
Ackerman’s property damage event.
the
Defendant did not receive
blow
up
prior
to
Justin
Defendant contended notice of
the blow up cannot be imputed due to the fact temperatures for the
month of July 2004, in the Cincinnati, Ohio area were not extremely
hot enough for a sufficient length of time to invoke a standard for
notice expressed in Allen, supra.
Defendant asserted plaintiffs
have failed to prove requisite notice and therefore, have failed to
establish any liability on the part of DOT for the property damage
sustained on July 13, 2004.
{¶ 4} Pavement upheavals or blow ups occur suddenly with little
or no advance presage.
Highway blow ups can and do occur under
weather conditions prevalent in the summer season in the state of
Ohio.
Such prevalent weather conditions were shown in the instant
action.
Contrary to defendant’s position the key issue to prove
liability for highway blow up damages was outlined in Knickel,
supra.
The issue regards generalized notice and generalized
foreseeability that blow ups can and do occur and when such a
roadway deterioration occurs with resulting damage, DOT is liable
for that damage.
prove
the
Plaintiffs have offered sufficient evidence to
property
damage
claimed
was
proximately
caused
by
defendant’s negligence.
IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO
DEBRA ACKERMAN, et al.
:
Plaintiffs
:
v.
:
CASE NO. 2004-08022-AD
:
ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE
DETERMINATION
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
:
Defendant
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :
Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for
the reasons set forth in the memorandum decision filed concurrently
herewith, judgment is rendered in favor of plaintiff, Debra
Ackerman, in the amount of $225.00, which includes the filing fee.
Court costs are assessed against defendant. The clerk shall serve
upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date of entry upon
the journal.
DANIEL R. BORCHERT
Deputy Clerk
Entry cc:
Debra Ackerman
Justin Ackerman
1915 Berkshire Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45230
Plaintiffs, Pro se
Gordon Proctor, Director
Department of Transportation
1980 West Broad Street
Columbus, Ohio 43223
For Defendant
RDK/laa
11/17
Filed 12/1/04
Sent to S.C. reporter 1/10/05
