| Volume Number: 30
Category(s): PRISONS AND PRISONERS |
|
| Opinion Issued May 23, 2014 | |
| RON TRAHAN | |
| VS. | |
| DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS | |
| (CC-10-0603) | |
|
Claimant appeared pro se. Cynthia R. M. Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent. |
|
| PER CURIAM:
Claimant, Ron Trahan, an inmate at Mount Olive Correctional Complex, brought this claim to recover the value of certain items of personal property that he alleges were converted by Respondent. The Claimant testified at the hearing of this matter that on numerous occasions he has left his cell and that while he was gone his personal property was stolen by his cell mate. Claimant stated that on at least four separate occasions he left for dinner, and when he returned, his clothing and CDs were gone. Claimant filed a grievance with Respondent asking for a new cell mate. Claimant’s grievance was denied on March 31, 2010, by the Commissioner. Claimant stated that it is possible that the cell mate could have left the cell door open and that another inmate could have stolen the property. Claimant argues that Respondent is responsible for his stolen property because it failed to provide him with a new cell mate. Respondent asserts that it cannot be held liable where no bailment was created and where it failed to act in a negligent manner. It is the law in West Virginia that the creation of a bailment situation “imposes upon the bailee the obligation to exercise reasonable and ordinary care for the safety of the property so delivered.” Barnette v. Casey, 124 W. Va. 143, This Court has held that a bailment exists when Respondent records the personal property of an inmate and takes it for storage purposes, and then has no satisfactory explanation for not returning it. Page v. Division of Corrections, 23 Ct. Cl. 238 (2000); Heard v. Division of Corrections, 21 Ct. Cl. 151 (1997). Here, Claimant fails to establish that Respondent was responsible for the stolen personal property. Claimant admitted in his testimony that it was possible that an inmate other than his cellmate could have stolen the items. Furthermore, Claimant did not provide the Court with receipts or any measurable proof of the value of his items. Therefore, the Court cannot recommend an award in this claim. Accordingly, the Court is of the opinion to, and does hereby, deny Claimant’s claim. Claim disallowed. |
|
| Summary: |
Webmaster | © 2024 West Virginia Legislature **