FUTRELL v. DEPT. OF REHAB. AND CORR., Unpublished Decision (3-14-2003)


FREDERICK FUTRELL, Plaintiff v. DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION, Defendant.

Case No. 2002-07932-AD.Court of Claims of Ohio.
Decided March 14, 2003.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

Gregory C. Trout, Chief Counsel Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, for defendant.

MEMORANDUM DECISION {¶ 1} THE COURT FINDS THAT:

{¶ 2} 1) On August 29, 2002, plaintiff, Frederick Futrell, filed a complaint against defendant, Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, alleging his property was lost while under the control of defendant’s staff. Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of $101.20 for property loss, plus $25.00 for filing fees. Plaintiff submitted the filing fee on September 25, 2002;

{¶ 3} 2) On January 16, 2003, defendant filed an investigation report admitting liability and acknowledging plaintiff suffered damages in the amount of $126.20.

{¶ 4} THE COURT CONCLUDES THAT:

{¶ 5} 1) I find, by a preponderance of the evidence, negligence by defendant has been shown. Baisden v. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility (1977), 76-0617-AD; Stewart v. Ohio National Guard (1979), 78-0342-AD;

{¶ 6} 2) Plaintiff has suffered damages in the amount of $101.20, plus the $25.00 filing fee, which may be reimbursed as compensable damages pursuant to the holding in Bailey v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (1990), 62 Ohio Misc.2d 19.

{¶ 7} Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and adopting the memorandum decision concurrently herewith;

{¶ 8} IT IS ORDERED THAT:

{¶ 9} 1) Plaintiff’s claim is GRANTED and judgment is rendered in favor of the plaintiff;

{¶ 10} 2) Defendant (Department of Rehabilitation and Correction) pay plaintiff (Frederick Futrell) $126.20 and such interest as is allowed by law;

{¶ 11} 3) Court costs are assessed against defendant.

DANIEL R. BORCHERT

Deputy Clerk