Harding v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Harding v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2007-Ohio-6956.] Court of Claims of Ohio The Ohio Judicial Center 65 South Front Street, Third Floor Columbus, OH 43215 614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263 www.cco.state.oh.us TRUDY HARDING Case No. 2007-04729-AD Plaintiff Clerk Miles C. Durfey v. MEMORANDUM DECISION OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Defendant FINDINGS OF FACT {¶1} 1) Plaintiff, Trudy Harding, stated that she was traveling east on US Route 30 near mile marker 6 in Massillon, through a construction area, when her automobile struck an object laying on the roadway. The object caused tire damage to plaintiff s vehicle. Plaintiff recalled that the described incident occurred at approximately 6:35 a.m. on July 26, 2006. {¶2} 2) Plaintiff contended that the damage to her car was proximately caused by negligence on the part of defendant, Department of Transportation (DOT), in keeping the roadway free of hazardous debris. Plaintiff filed this complaint seeking to recover $183.63 for replacement part costs and associated repair expenses. The filing fee was paid. {¶3} 3) Defendant denied liability based on the contention that no DOT personnel had any knowledge of debris on the roadway prior to plaintiff s property damage event. Defendant denied receiving any calls or complaints about roadway debris near the described location, milepost 6.00 on US Route 30 in Stark County. Defendant explained that at the time of plaintiff s incident, July 26, 2006, roadway construction on US Route 30 had not begun. Defendant suggested that the debris Case No. 2007-04729-AD -2- MEMORANDUM DECISION plaintiff s vehicle struck, existed in that location for only a relatively short amount of time before plaintiff s incident. Defendant noted that DOT conducted litter pick-up operations near milepost 6.00 on US Route 30 in Stark County on July 12, 2006. {¶4} 4) Despite filing a response, plaintiff did not produce any evidence to establish the length of time the damage-causing debris condition was present on the roadway before 6:35 a.m. on July 26, 2006. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW {¶5} Defendant has the duty to maintain its highways in a reasonably safe condition for the motoring public. Knickel v. Ohio Department of Transportation (1976), 49 Ohio App. 2d 335, 3 O.O. 3d 413, 361 N.E. 2d 486. However, defendant is not an insurer of the safety of its highways. See Kniskern v. Township of Somerford (1996), 112 Ohio App. 3d 189, 678 N.E. 2d 273; Rhodus v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. (1990), 67 Ohio App. 3d 723, 588 N.E. 2d 864. {¶6} In order to recover in any suit involving injury proximately caused by roadway conditions including debris, plaintiff must prove either: 1) defendant had actual or constructive notice of the debris and failed to respond in a reasonable time or responded in a negligent manner, or 2) that defendant, in a general sense, maintains its highway negligently. Denis v. Department of Transportation (1976), 75-0287-AD. {¶7} Defendant is only liable for roadway conditions of which it has notice, but fails to reasonably correct. Bussard v. Dept. of Transp. (1986), 31 Ohio Misc. 2d 1, 31 OBR 64, 507 N.E. 2d 1179. {¶8} Plaintiff has not produced any evidence to indicate the length of time the debris condition was present on the roadway prior to the incident forming the basis of this claim. No evidence has been submitted to show that defendant had actual notice of the debris. Additionally, the trier of fact is precluded from making an inference of defendant s constructive notice, unless evidence is presented in respect to the time the debris appeared on the roadway. Spires v. Ohio Highway Department (1988), 61 Ohio Misc. 2d 262, 577 N.E. 2d 458. No evidence has shown defendant had constructive Case No. 2007-04729-AD -3- MEMORANDUM DECISION notice of the roadway debris. {¶9} Finally, plaintiff has not produced any evidence to infer defendant, in a general sense, maintains its highways negligently or that defendant s acts caused the debris. Herlihy v. Ohio Department of Transportation (1999), 99-07011-AD. Therefore, defendant is not liable for any damage plaintiff may have suffered from the roadway debris. Case No. 2007-04729-AD -4- MEMORANDUM DECISION Court of Claims of Ohio The Ohio Judicial Center 65 South Front Street, Third Floor Columbus, OH 43215 614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263 www.cco.state.oh.us TRUDY HARDING Plaintiff Case No. 2007-04729-AD Clerk Miles C. Durfey v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION 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 defendant. Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. ________________________________ MILES C. DURFEY Clerk Entry cc: Trudy Harding 1315 Amanda Street S.W. Massillon, Ohio 44647 James G. Beasley, Director Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223 RDK/laa 9/6 Filed 9/26/07 Sent to S.C. reporter 12/21/07
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.
