Medina v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Medina v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2006-Ohio-7146.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO ANGEL D. MEDINA : Plaintiff : v. : CASE NO. 2005-09952-AD OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION : MEMORANDUM DECISION : Defendant : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : FINDINGS OF FACT {¶ 1} 1) On March 27, 2005, at approximately 1:10 p.m., plaintiff, Angel D. Medina, was traveling east on Interstate 90 near milepost 172 in Cuyahoga County, when his automobile ran over a tire laying on the traveled portion of the roadway. The tire debris caused substantial damage to plaintiff s vehicle. {¶ 2} 2) Consequently, plaintiff filed this complaint seeking to recover $813.70, his cost of automotive repair which he contends was incurred as a result of negligence on the part of defendant, roadway. Department of Transportation, in maintaining the The filing fee was paid. {¶ 3} 3) Defendant has denied any liability for plaintiff s damage. Defendant denied having any knowledge debris condition prior to plaintiff s incident. a response, plaintiff has failed to of the tire Despite filing produce any evidence establishing the length of time the tire debris condition was on the roadway prior to his property damage occurrence. conducts frequent litter inspections and litter Defendant pick-up operations in the area of plaintiff s March 27, 2005, property damage event. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW {¶ 4} Defendant has the duty to maintain its highway in a reasonably safe condition for the motoring public. Knickel v. Ohio Department of Transportation (1976), 49 Ohio App. 2d 335. However, defendant highways. is not an insurer of the safety of its See Kniskern v. Township of Somerford (1996), 112 Ohio App. 3d 189; Rhodus v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. (1990), 67 Ohio App. 3d 723. {¶ 5} In order proximately plaintiff to caused must recover by prove in roadway either: any suit conditions 1) involving including defendant had injury debris, 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, negligently. in a general sense, maintains its highways Denis v. Department of Transportation (1976), 75- 0287-AD. {¶ 6} 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. {¶ 7} 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 defendant had actual notice of the debris. from making an Additionally, the trier of fact is precluded inference of defendant s constructive notice, unless evidence is presented in respect to the time the debris appeared on the roadway. Spires v. Highway Department (1988), 61 Ohio Misc. 2d 262. There is no indication defendant had constructive notice of the debris. {¶ 8} Finally, plaintiff, has not produced any evidence to infer defendant, negligently condition. 99-07011-AD. or in that a general sense, defendant s acts maintains caused its the highways defective Herlihy v. Ohio Department of Transportation (1999), Therefore, defendant is not liable for any damage plaintiff may have suffered from the roadway debris. IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO ANGEL D. MEDINA : Plaintiff : v. : : OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CASE NO. 2005-09952-AD 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 defendant. herewith, judgment is rendered in favor Court costs are assessed against plaintiff. of 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: Jillian S. Davis Towards Employment, Inc. 1255 Euclid Avenue, Suite 300 Cleveland, Ohio 44115 Attorney for Plaintiff Gordon Proctor, Director Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223 For Defendant RDK/laa 3/3 Filed 3/17/06 Sent to S.C. reporter 4/7/06
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.
