Conn v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Conn v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2006-Ohio-1017.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO WILLIS CONN, et al. : Plaintiffs : v. : CASE NO. 2005-10250-AD : ENTRY OF DISMISSAL OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION : Defendant : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : {¶ 1} On October 7, 2005, Willis and Gina Conn, plaintiffs, filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Transportation. The plaintiffs allege on August 8, 2005, at approximately 12:15 12:30 p.m., defendant was working on the roadway near their home and was diverting traffic on the shoulder of the roadway. At that time, a semi-truck struck a power line that was attached to the plaintiffs home, cutting their power. Plaintiffs seek damages in the amount of $500.00, their deductible for repair of the damage caused by the semi-truck. Plaintiffs submitted the filing fee with the complaint. {¶ 2} On December 15, 2005, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. In support of the motion, defendant stated in pertinent part: {¶ 3} Defendant has performed an investigation of this area and this portion of SR-252. The location of the power line struck by the semi truck falls under the maintenance jurisdiction of Olmsted Falls Township (See Exhibits A and B). {¶ 4} More specifically, the cause of the damage must have been a power line hanging to low across the roadway and right of way. This would include the area indicated in the pictures offered by Case No. 2005-10250-AD -2- ENTRY plaintiff which shows a vehicle between the edge of the roadway and the white pavement line. Power lines required to be at least 15'15" in height. crossing roadways are The duty to maintain and monitor this clearance is the jurisdiction responsible for issuing the areal permits. In this case, permits in this section of roadway are issued by Olmstead [F]alls Township, thus ODOT has no jurisdiction to issue, monitor, regulate, or maintain the areal [sic] permits. {¶ 5} As such, the utility lines which must have been hanging to low are not within the maintenance jurisdiction of the defendant. {¶ 6} Plaintiffs have not responded to defendant s motion to dismiss. {¶ 7} Defendant has no duty to maintain the power lines in the area of the damage-causing incident. That duty rests with Olmsted Falls Township and the utility carrier involved. Accordingly, defendant had no responsibility with respect to the height or maintenance of the power lines in the area. Consequently, plaintiffs 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. Plaintiffs case is DISMISSED. the court costs of this case. The court shall absorb The court shall serve upon all parties notice of this entry of dismissal and its date of entry upon the journal. ________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Case No. 2005-10250-AD -3- ENTRY Entry cc: Willis Conn Gina Conn 7157 Columbia Road Olmsted Falls, Ohio Plaintiffs, Pro se 44138 Thomas P. Pannett, P.E. Assistant Legal Counsel Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223 DRB/laa 1/25 Filed 2/14/06 Sent to S.C. reporter 3/3/06 For Defendant
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.
