Wuchich v. Mansfield Correctional Inst.
This text of 2011 Ohio 1756 (Wuchich v. Mansfield Correctional Inst.) 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 Wuchich v. Mansfield Correctional Inst., 2011-Ohio-1756.]
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
DIANE S. WUCHICH
Plaintiff
v.
MANSFIELD CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
Defendant
Case No. 2010-09426-AD
Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert
MEMORANDUM DECISION
FINDINGS OF FACT {¶ 1} “1) Plaintiff, Diane S. Wuchich, filed this action against defendant, Mansfield Correctional Institution (ManCI), contending her 2009 Hummer H3T was damaged while parked in a parking lot on ManCI grounds. Specifically, plaintiff contended the driver’s side rear door on her vehicle was dented as a proximate cause of negligence on the part of a ManCI maintenance crew conducting lawn mowing and weed eating operations on July 1, 2010 around the parking lot area. In her complaint, plaintiff provided estimates for automotive repair costs to repair her damaged vehicle. The amounts of the provided estimates were $409.49 and $632.10. Plaintiff did not designate a specific amount request in her complaint. The filing fee was paid. {¶ 2} “2) Defendant filed an investigation report admitting liability for plaintiff’s property damage and acknowledging damages in the amount of $409.49. Plaintiff did not respond. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW {¶ 3} “1) Defendant was charged with a duty to exercise reasonable care for the protection of plaintiff’s property while performing any maintenance work. Hoelle v. Miami Univ., Ct. of Cl. No. 2005-06970-AD, 2005-Ohio-4643. In regards to the facts of this claim, negligence on the part of defendant has been shown. Rust v. Miami Univ., Ct. of Cl. No. 2005-01226-AD, 2005-Ohio-1248; Laux v. Cleveland State Univ., Ct. of Cl. No. 2007-01410-AD, 2007-Ohio-2409; Dunlap v. Ohio University, Ct. of Cl. No. 2009- 06010-AD, 2009-Ohio-7081. {¶ 4} “2) Consequently, defendant is liable to plaintiff for the damage claimed, $409.49, 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
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 $434.49, which includes the filing fee. Court costs are assessed against defendant.
DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk
Entry cc:
Diane S. Wuchich Gregory C. Trout, Chief Counsel 133 Mohican Trail Department of Rehabilitation Lexington, Ohio 44904 and Correction 770 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43222 RDK/laa Filed 1/26/11 Sent to S.C. reporter 4/8/11
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2011 Ohio 1756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wuchich-v-mansfield-correctional-inst-ohioctcl-2011.