2010-Ohio-4229
No. 2010-02774-AD.Court of Claims of Ohio.
Filed May 5, 2010.
MEMORANDUM DECISION FINDINGS OF FACT {¶ 1} 1) Plaintiff, Matthew Corriveau, filed this complaint against defendant, Department of Transportation (ODOT), alleging that he suffered substantial damage to his 2006 Hyundai Accent as a proximate cause of negligence on the part of ODOT in maintaining a hazardous condition on State Route 315 North in Columbus. Plaintiff related his vehicle struck a pothole that “was just north of Mount Carmel hospital, under a bridge, in the middle lane” of State Route 315. Plaintiff recalled the incident occurred on January 22, 2010 at approximately 9:30 p.m. Plaintiff seeks recovery of damages in the amount of $416.13, the cost of replacement parts and related repair expenses he incurred as a result of his vehicle striking the pothole. The filing fee was paid.
{¶ 2} 2) Defendant filed an investigation report requesting plaintiff’s claim be dismissed due to the fact the City of Columbus and not ODOT bears the maintenance responsibility for the section of State Route 315 where plaintiff’s incident occurred. Defendant advised ODOT “takes care of SR 315 at Hard Road which is north of this
Page 2
location.” Defendant stated “[i]n sum, the City of Columbus is responsible for the maintenance of the roadway upon which plaintiff’s incident occurred (and) [a]s such, the City of Columbus is the proper party to plaintiff’s claim.” The site of the damage incident was not on a roadway area maintained by ODOT.
{¶ 3} 3) Plaintiff did not respond.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW {¶ 4} Ohio Revised Code Section 5501.31 in pertinent part states:
{¶ 5} “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, but he may construct, reconstruct, widen, resurface, maintain, and repair the same with or without the cooperation of any municipal corporation, or with or without the cooperation of boards of county commissioners upon each municipal corporation consenting thereto.”
{¶ 6} The site of the damage-causing incident was not the maintenance jurisdiction of defendant. Consequently, plaintiff’s case is dismissed.
Page 3
Page 4
ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION
Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth above, plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED. The court shall absorb the court costs of this case.
Entry cc:
Matthew Corriveau 725 E. Mitchell Avenue Cincinnati, Ohio 45229
Jolene M. Molitoris, Director Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223
Page 1