Winterbotham v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Winterbotham v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2005-Ohio-5749.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO DARIN M. WINTERBOTHAM : Plaintiff : v. : CASE NO. 2005-08646-AD : ENTRY OF DISMISSAL OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DISTRICT #8 : Defendant : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : {¶ 1} On July 25, 2005, plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Transportation. Plaintiff alleges on June 25, 2005, at approximately 4:15 p.m., while traveling northbound on Clarksville Road (just south of the dam), he struck a pothole in the traveled portion of the roadway which caused damage to the trailer he was towing. Plaintiff seeks reimbursement of repair costs to his trailer which totaled $550.60. Plaintiff submitted the filing fee with the complaint. {¶ 2} On August 19, 2005, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. In support of the motion to dismiss, defendant in pertinent part stated: {¶ 3} Defendant maintenance of the asserts roadway it is not where the responsible pothole was for the located. Defendant s investigation reveals that Clarksville Road is known as County Road 37 (CR 37) and is not maintained by ODOT. County Road 37 falls under the maintenance jurisdiction of the Warren County Engineer (See Exhibit A). As such, this section of roadway is not within the maintenance jurisdiction of the defendant. {¶ 4} Plaintiff has not responded to defendant s motion to Case No. 2005-08646-AD dismiss. The site -2of ENTRY plaintiff s incident was within the maintenance jurisdiction of Warren County. {¶ 5} R.C. 5501.11 in pertinent part states: {¶ 6} The functions of the department of transportation with respect to highways shall be: (A) To establish state highways on exiting new roads, streets, and locations and to construct, reconstruct, widen, resurface, maintain, and repair the state system of highways and the bridges and culverts thereon . . . {¶ 7} The site of the damage-causing incident was not the maintenance responsibility of defendant. Consequently, plaintiff s case is dismissed. {¶ 8} Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth above, defendant s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff s case is DISMISSED. the court costs of this case. The court shall absorb The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of his entry of dismissal and its date of entry upon the journal. ________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Entry cc: Darin M. Winterbotham 1010 Rose Petal Court Waynesville, Ohio 45068 Plaintiff, Pro se Thomas P. Pannett, P.E. Assistant Legal Counsel Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223 For Defendant Case No. 2005-08646-AD DRB/laa 9/29 Filed 10/7/05 Sent to S.C. reporter 10/27/05 -2- ENTRY
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
