Waituika v. Office of Properties & Facilities
This text of 2010 Ohio 5833 (Waituika v. Office of Properties & Facilities) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as Waituika v. Office of Properties & Facilities, 2010-Ohio-5833.]
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
NANCY WAITUIKA
Plaintiff
v.
OFFICE OF PROPERTIES AND FACILITIES
Defendant
Case No. 2010-05757-AD
Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert
MEMORANDUM DECISION
FINDINGS OF FACT {¶ 1} 1) Plaintiff, Nancy Waituika, filed this action against defendant, Department of Administrative Services (DAS), contending that her 2000 Honda Odyssey was damaged by malfunctioning traffic control bollards located at the exit- entrance of the State of Ohio Computer Center, a facility operated by DAS. Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of $500.00, her insurance deductible for repair expenses and related costs. The $25.00 filing fee was paid and plaintiff requested reimbursement of that cost along with her damage claim. {¶ 2} 2) Defendant filed an investigation report admitting liability and acknowledging plaintiff Nancy Waituika suffered damages in the amount of $500.00. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW {¶ 3} 1) Plaintiff has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the particular traffic control malfunctioned during normal and intended use. Saunders v. The Ohio State University (1993), 93-05245-AD. To make such a showing, plaintiff must produce sufficient evidence or documentation to satisfy the trier of fact. Saunders. {¶ 4} 2) After review of plaintiff’s complaint, the defendant’s investigation report and other evidence in the case file, the court makes the following determination. The court concludes plaintiff has proven her vehicle was damaged by malfunctioning traffic control bollards located on the premises of the defendant. Consortium Communications, Inc. v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (2002), 2002-01420-AD. Therefore, defendant is liable to plaintiff for damages of $500.00, plus the $25.00 filing fee, which may be reimbursed as compensable costs pursuant to R.C. 2335.19. See Bailey v. Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (1990), 62 Ohio Misc. 2d 19, 587 N.E. 2d 990.
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
Defendant Case No. 2010-05757-AD
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, judgment is rendered in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $525.00, which includes the filing fee. Court costs are assessed against defendant.
DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk
Entry cc:
Nancy Waituika Paul A. J. Gunnell 5908 Sonoma Court Office of Properties and Facilities Columbus, Ohio 43229 1320 Arthur E. Adams Drive Columbus, Ohio 43221 RDK/laa 7/22 Filed 8/9/10 Sent to S.C. reporter 11/23/10
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2010 Ohio 5833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/waituika-v-office-of-properties-facilities-ohioctcl-2010.