Rudolfsky v. Ohio Dept. of Transp. , 2011 Ohio 6589 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Rudolfsky v. Ohio Dept. of Transp., 
    2011-Ohio-6589
    .]
    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
    DANIELLE RUDOLFSKY
    Plaintiff
    v.
    OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    Defendant
    Case No. 2011-06625-AD
    Acting Clerk Daniel R. Borchert
    MEMORANDUM DECISION
    FINDINGS OF FACT
    {¶1}     Plaintiff,   Danielle     Rudolfsky,      filed   this   action   against      defendant,
    Department of Transportation (ODOT), alleging that she suffered property damage to
    her car as a proximate result of negligence on the part of ODOT in maintaining a
    hazardous condition on Pleasant Valley Road in Parma, Ohio. Plaintiff related her
    vehicle struck a pothole and the impact caused tire damage to plaintiff’s vehicle. In her
    complaint, plaintiff requested damages in the amount of $585.83, the stated cost of
    replacement parts and automotive repair expenses.
    {¶2}     Defendant filed an investigation report requesting plaintiff’s claim be
    dismissed due to the fact the City of Parma and not ODOT bears the maintenance
    responsibility for the section of Pleasant Valley Road where plaintiff’s incident occurred.
    In support of the request to dismiss, ODOT stated, “[d]efendant has performed an
    investigation of this site and the City of Parma takes care of this section of Pleasant
    Valley Road.” Defendant submitted documentation (map) showing that the particular
    section of Pleasant Valley Road is located within the maintenance jurisdiction of the City
    of Parma.       ODOT advised, “[a]s such, this section of roadway is not within the
    maintenance jurisdiction of the defendant.” The site of the damage-causing incident
    was located in the City of Parma.
    {¶3}    On July 22, 2011, plaintiff filed a response stating she agreed with
    defendant’s investigation results and requesting her claim be dismissed.
    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
    {¶4}    R.C. 2743.10(A) provides:
    {¶5}    “(A) ‘State’ means the state of Ohio, including, but not limited to, the
    general assembly, the supreme court, the offices of all elected state officers, and all
    departments,     boards,   offices,   commissions,     agencies,    institutions,   and   other
    instrumentalities of the state. ‘State’ does not include political subdivisions.”
    {¶6}    R.C. 2743.02(A)(1) states in pertinent part:
    {¶7}    “(A)(1) The state hereby waives its immunity from liability, except as
    provided for the office of the state fire marshal in division (G)(1) of section 9.60 and
    division (B) of section 3737.221 of the Revised Code and subject to division (H) of this
    section, and consents to be sued, and have its liability determined, in the court of claims
    created in this chapter in accordance with the same rules of law applicable to suits
    between private parties, except that the determination of liability is subject to the
    limitations set forth in this chapter and, in the case of state universities or colleges, in
    section 3345.40 of the Revised Code, and except as provided in division (A)(2) or (3) of
    this section. To the extent that the state has previously consented to be sued, this
    chapter has no applicability.”
    {¶8}    R.C.   5501.31 in pertinent part states:
    {¶9}    “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 . . .”
    {¶10} The site of the damage-causing incident was not within the maintenance
    jurisdiction of defendant. Consequently, plaintiff’s case is dismissed.
    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
    DANIELLE RUDOLFSKY
    Plaintiff
    v.
    OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    Defendant
    Case No. 2011-06625-AD
    Acting Clerk Daniel R. Borchert
    ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION
    Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth
    in the memorandum decision filed concurrently herewith, plaintiff’s claim is DISMISSED.
    Court costs are assessed against plaintiff.
    ________________________________
    DANIEL R. BORCHERT
    Acting Clerk
    Entry cc:
    Danielle Rudolfsky                               Jerry Wray, Director
    400 West Aurora Road #42                         Department of Transportation
    Sagamore Hills, Ohio 44067                       1980 West Broad Street
    Columbus, Ohio 43223
    7/25
    Filed 8/3/11
    Sent to S.C. reporter 12/20/11
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2011-06625-AD

Citation Numbers: 2011 Ohio 6589

Judges: Borchert

Filed Date: 8/3/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014