SENATE
HOUSE
JOINT
BILL STATUS
STATE LAW
REPORTS
EDUCATIONAL
CONTACT
home
home

West Virginia Legislative Claims Commission

Volume Number: 30
Category(s): NEGLIGENCE
Opinion Issued May 23, 2014
RAYMOND D. SLAPPE AND PAMELA L. SLAPPE
VS.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(CC-12-0587)
     Claimants appeared pro se.
     C. Brian Matko, Attorney at Law, for Respondent.
     PER CURIAM:
      Claimants, Raymond and Pamela Slappe, brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when their 2001 Dodge Caravan SE was struck by a tree limb while parked along Eureka Road in Charleston, Kanawha County. Eureka Road is a road maintained by respondent. The Court is of the opinion to deny the claim for the reasons more fully stated below.
      The facts giving rise to this claim occurred on October 30, 2012, at approximately 8:45 a.m. Claimants testified that due to the large amounts of snowfall from a storm event known nationally as “Superstorm Sandy,” the storm which caused the Governor of the State to issue a state of emergency, Claimants were attempting to clear the snow from their vehicle so that Claimant Pamela Slappe could leave for work. Claimant Pamela Slappe exited the home first and began to clear off the vehicle. As Claimant Raymond Slappe was exiting the home to assist his wife he heard a loud crash. Claimant Raymond Slappe then stated that a tree had broken under the weight of the snow and landed on the Claimants’ vehicle. Claimants also allege that Claimant Pamela Slappe was struck by the tree when it fell resulting in severe bruising to her person. As a result of this incident, Claimants’ vehicle sustained a total loss. Claimants seek monetary damages for the value of their vehicle, the cost for cleaning up the tree debris, and Claimant Pamela Slappe’s physical damage and pain and suffering. Claimants carried an automobile policy on the date of the incident with a $100.00 comprehensive deductible amount. Claimants allege that Respondent was negligent because the tree is located on Respondent’s right of way.
      The position of the Respondent is that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the condition of the tree in question at the time of the incident; therefore, it cannot be held liable.
      In the instant case, the Court is constrained to recommend against an award in this claim as there is no evidence that the Respondent had actual or constructive notice of the potential hazard alleged in the complaint.
      In view of the foregoing, the Court is of the opinion to, and does hereby, deny this claim.
      Claim disallowed.
     
Summary:
     


If your search was unsuccessful, please try the full volume in Archived Decisions


Decisions | Home
This Web site is maintained by the West Virginia Legislature's Office of Reference & Information.  |  Terms of Use  |   Email WebmasterWebmaster   |   © 2024 West Virginia Legislature **