Stuart v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Stuart v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 2007-Ohio-7247.] 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 LOUIS STUART Case No. 2007-05211-AD Plaintiff Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert v. MEMORANDUM DECISION OHIO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION Defendant {¶1} On April 4, 2007, at approximately 10:00 p.m., plaintiff, Louis Stuart, was driving his 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee on the Route 422 East Ramp, when he lost control of the vehicle causing it to collide with a car parked on the roadway berm. Plaintiff stated he saw two cars stopped on the roadway berm and began to slow his vehicle as he approached a bridge on US Route 422 spanning Interstate 271 South. Plaintiff related as he traveled on the bridge he, realized it was a sheet of ice and consequently, had no control of the vehicle. Furthermore, plaintiff noted, the pitch angle of the bridge made the vehicle slide into the car that was on the inside berm of the bridge. After plaintiff s Jeep collided with the car stopped on the roadway berm, the Jeep was struck by another vehicle traveling on the icy bridge roadway. Plaintiff contended the April 4, 2007 motor vehicle collision was caused by, black ice and [defendant, Ohio Department of Transportation] O.D.O.T. not salting the bridge. {¶2} Plaintiff asserted the April 4, 2007, accident and resulting damage to his vehicle was proximately caused by negligence on the part of defendant, Department of Transportation ( DOT ). Specifically, plaintiff argued DOT was negligent in failing to apply salt to the bridge on US Route 422 Ramp in Warrensville Heights, Ohio. Therefore, plaintiff filed this complaint seeking to recover $500.00, his insurance coverage deductible for automotive repair costs. The filing fee was paid. {¶3} Defendant denied any liability in this matter based on the contention that Case No. 2007-05211-AD -2- MEMORANDUM DECISION no DOT personnel had any knowledge regarding the condition of the roadway surface prior to plaintiff s incident. Defendant denied receiving any calls or complaints about ice on the roadway at the particular area of plaintiff s damage occurrence which DOT located at state milepost 28.0 on Interstate 271 in Cuyahoga County. Defendant reasoned, it is more likely than not that the road surface existed in that location for only a relatively short amount of time before plaintiff s incident. Presumedly, defendant seems to be arguing the icy slippery roadway conditions appeared suddenly before DOT could respond to ameliorate the conditions. {¶4} Defendant asserted plaintiff failed to prove DOT acted negligently in conducting its roadway maintenance responsibilities. Defendant s records point out it rained all day on April 4, 2007, and DOT crews were called in at 10:00 p.m. to salt the roads. Also, DOT records show snow plow drivers salted Interstate 271 and US Route 422 beginning after 10:00 p.m. on April 4, 2007. Defendant stated DOT, is not an insurer of the highways. Defendant denied DOT acted negligently in maintaining the roadway in question on April 4, 2007. {¶5} Defendant has a duty to maintain the roadways in a safe reasonable manner. See Knickel v. Ohio Department of Transportation (1976), 49 Ohio App. 2d 335, 3 O.O. 3d 413, 361 N.E. 2d 486. However, pursuant to R.C. 5501.41, DOT does not have a statutory duty to remove snow and ice from its roads. See, also, King v. Ohio Dept. of Transportation (Mar. 10, 1994), Franklin App. No. 93AP-918, unreported. {¶6} Furthermore, DOT s duty to maintain the roadways does not extend to removal of natural accumulations of snow and ice. Therefore, since defendant had no duty to remove natural accumulations of snow and ice from the roadway, no liability shall attach even under such circumstances where a plaintiff proves he suffered damages as a proximate cause of DOT s failure to clear snow and ice from the roadway. See Mingus v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. (March 29, 1994), Franklin App. No. 93API11-1543 unreported. Based on the above mentioned holdings, plaintiff s claim is denied. Case No. 2007-05211-AD -3- 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 LOUIS STUART Plaintiff Case No. 2007-05211-AD Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert v. OHIO DEPT. 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. ________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Entry cc: Louis Stuart 6531 Brooks Blvd. Mentor, Ohio 44060 RDK/laa 11/28 James G. Beasley, Director Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Filed 12/20/07 Sent to S.C. reporter 2/5/08
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.
