Rosario v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., Dist. 4
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Rosario v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., Dist. 4, 2008-Ohio-7109.] 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 MARK ROSARIO Plaintiff v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DISTRICT 4 Defendant Case No. 2008-01537-AD Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert ENTRY OF DISMISSAL {¶ 1} On January 23, 2008, plaintiff, Mark Rosario, filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Transportation. Plaintiff asserted the roof of his 2005 Hyundai Sonata was damaged when a tree limb from property owned by defendant fell on his vehicle. Plaintiff asserts he sustained damages in the amount of $2,186.45 as a result of the alleged negligence of defendant in not removing the tree. {¶ 2} Defendant filed a motion to dismiss. In support of the motion to dismiss, defendant stated in pertinent part: {¶ 3} During the pendency of this complaint, Defendant has learned that plaintiff no longer has possession of his vehicle; apparently it has been repossessed by the bank. A certified letter was sent out on May 6, 2008, for plaintiff to sign so that such an affirmation could be made by the plaintiff directly and sent to the Court of Claims to be included with this Motion. Unfortunately, said letter has not been returned, and defendant did not wish to delay its response to the Court further. (See Exhibit A) {¶ 4} Given that plaintiff no longer has an interest in the vehicle and has spent Case No. 2008-01537-AD -2- ENTRY no money in its repair, Defendant moves this court do dismiss plaintiff s cause of action for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. {¶ 5} Civ. R. 17(A) in pertinent part states: {¶ 6} Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. {¶ 7} The facts indicate that plaintiff has suffered no damages as the result of this incident. His vehicle was repossessed and he did not pay for any repair. {¶ 8} Plaintiff has not responded to defendant s motion to dismiss. {¶ 9} Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth above, defendant s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff s case is DISMISSED. The court shall absorb the court costs of this case. ________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk Entry cc: Mark Rosario 1022 West 51st Ashtabula, Ohio 44004 DRB/laa 12/9 Filed 12/16/08 Sent to S.C. reporter 3/6/09 Thomas P. Pannett Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223
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.
