Topping v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Topping v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2006-Ohio-7218.] IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO DOROTHY S. TOPPING : Plaintiff : v. : CASE NO. 2006-02650-AD OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION : ENTRY OF DISMISSAL : Defendant : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : {¶ 1} On March 23, 2006, plaintiff, Dorothy S. Topping, filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Transportation. Plaintiff alleges on March 13, 2006, she was driving southbound on State Route 104 and had just passed the Meade Paper Mill when she struck a pothole which caused damage to her vehicle. Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of $129.97 for automotive repair she asserts was caused maintaining the roadway. by defendant s negligence in Plaintiff submitted the filing fee with the complaint. {¶ 2} On April 27, 2006, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. In support of the motion to dismiss, defendant stated in pertinent part: {¶ 3} Defendant has performed an investigation of this site and SR 104 by the Meade Paper Mill falls under the maintenance jurisdiction of the City of Chillicothe. The Ross County Manager, Aaron Mitten, reviewed the southbound area of SR 104 and took photos of the bridge at the Meade Paper Mill. This area falls under the maintenance jurisdiction of the City of Case No. 2006-02650-AD Chillicothe. -2- ENTRY (See Exhibit A.) Plaintiff mentions that she was going the speed limit of 50 mph and the speed reduces as you enter the City of Chillicothe. The outside the city limits of Chillicothe. of roadway is not within the speed limit is 55 mph As such, this section maintenance jurisdiction of defendant. {¶ 4} Plaintiff has not responded to defendant s motion to dismiss. The site of plaintiff s incident was within the City of Chillicothe. {¶ 5} R.C. 5501.31 in pertinent part states: {¶ 6} Except in the case of maintaining, repairing, erecting traffic signs on, or pavement marking of state highways within villages, which is mandatory as required by section 5521.01 of the Revised Code, and except as provided in section 5501.49 of the Revised Code, no duty of constructing, reconstructing, widening, resurfacing, maintaining, or repairing state highways within municipal corporations, or the bridges and culverts thereon, shall attach to or rest upon the director. {¶ 7} The site of the damage-causing incident was not the maintenance responsibility plaintiff s case is dismissed. of defendant. Consequently, Case No. 2006-02650-AD -2- ENTRY {¶ 8} Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons dismiss is GRANTED. set forth above, defendant s Plaintiff s case is DISMISSED. shall absorb the court costs of this case. motion to The court The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this entry of dismissal and its date of entry upon the journal. _____________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Entry cc: Dorothy S. Topping P.O. Box 135 Waverly, Ohio 45690-0135 Plaintiff, Pro se Thomas P. Pannett, P.E. Assistant Legal Counsel Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223 For Defendant DRB/laa 6/29 Filed 7/13/06 Sent to S.C. reporter 3/22/07
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.
