|Volume Number: 30
Category(s): STIPULATED CLAIMS
|Opinion Issued December 26, 2013|
|DARLEEN R. CALDWELL|
|DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS|
Claimant appeared pro se.
C. Brian Matko, Attorney at Law, for Respondent.
| PER CURIAM:
This claim was submitted to the Court for decision upon a Stipulation entered into by Claimant and Respondent wherein certain facts and circumstances of the claim were agreed to as follows:
1. The Claimant is the owner of a certain parcel of property located in St. Albans, Kanawha County, West Virginia, with a physical address of 288 Hampshire Drive, St. Albans, West Virginia.
2. Claimant has alleged that on July 20, 2010, during a substantial rainstorm, a wall of water rushed down the Claimant’s driveway causing damage to the above-described property. The Claimant has further alleged that a culvert, which is maintained by Respondent, was smashed and filled with debris at the time of the aforementioned storm, so as to cause the water to cross over Hampshire Drive and go down the Claimant’s driveway. The Claimant sought $7,360.00 as damages in the above-styled matter.
3. The Respondent denied liability in this matter and asserted that a change in Claimant’s driveway redirected the flow of water away from its natural drainage course and down the Claimant’s driveway. However, Claimant does agree with Respondent that Claimant does bare a percentage of the responsibility with regard to this claim.
4. Both the Claimant and Respondent believe that in this particular incident and under these particular circumstances that an award of Four Thousand Dollars and 00/100 cents ($4,000.00) would be a fair and reasonable amount to settle Claimant’s claim for damages.
5. The parties to this claim agree that the total sum of Four Thousand Dollars and 00/100 cents ($4,000.00) to be paid by Respondent to the Claimants in Claim No. CC-11-0577 will be a full and complete settlement, compromise and resolution of all matters in controversy in said claim and full and complete satisfaction of any and all past and future claims Claimant may have against Respondent arising from the matters described in said claim.
The Court has reviewed the facts of the claim and finds that Respondent was negligent in its maintenance of the culvert on the date of this incident; that the negligence of Respondent was the proximate cause of the damages sustained to Claimant’s property; and that the amount of damages agreed to by the parties is fair and reasonable. Thus, Claimant may make a recovery for the damage.
It is the opinion of the Court of Claims that the Claimant should be awarded the sum of $4,000.00 in this claim.
Award of $4,000.00.