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

West Virginia Legislative Claims Commission

Volume Number: 30
Category(s): STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
Opinion Issued June 15, 2015
DONNA CHATMAN
VS.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(CC-14-1298)
     Claimant appeared pro se.
     C. Brian Matko, Attorney at Law, and Keith Cox, Attorney at Law, for Respondent.
     PER CURIAM:
      Claimant brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when her 2007 Chevrolet Monte Carlo was splattered with concrete while traveling through a road construction zone on Interstate 77 near Pocatalico, Kanawha County. Interstate 77 is a public road maintained by Respondent. The Court is of the opinion to make an award in this claim for the reasons more fully stated below.
      The incident giving rise to this claim occurred at approximately 2:00 p.m. on June 28, 2014. At the time of the incident, Claimant was traveling north on Interstate 77 when she came upon an area of road construction. Claimant passed slowly through the construction zone without incident, and later arrived at her destination. The next day Claimant noticed that concrete was splattered on the passenger side of her vehicle. Claimant testified that she had not driven the vehicle in any area on the prior day where it might have encountered wet concrete, other than the road construction zone. Claimant further testified that she had tried to wash the concrete off the vehicle herself, but was unsuccessful.
      As a result of this incident, Claimant’s vehicle sustained damage in the amount of $3,238.72.
      Since Claimant’s insurance declaration sheet indicates that her collision deductible is $500.00, Claimant’s recovery is limited to that amount.
      It is Claimant’s position that Respondent knew or should have known about the wet concrete on Interstate 77 which created a damaging and hazardous condition to the traveling public, and that Respondent was negligent in failing to properly maintain the construction zone and provide proper warning to the traveling public of wet concrete prior to the incident.
      The position of the Respondent is that it did not have actual or constructive notice of wet concrete on Interstate 77 at the time of the incident. Respondent presented no witnesses.
      The well-established principle of law in West Virginia is that the State is neither an insurer nor a guarantor of the safety of travelers upon its roads. Adkins v. Sims, 130 W.Va. 645; 46 S.E.2d 81 (1947). In order to hold Respondent liable for road defects of this type, Claimant must prove that Respondent had actual or constructive notice of the defect and a reasonable amount of time to take corrective action. Pritt v. Dep’t of Highways, 16 Ct. Cl. 8 (1985); Chapman v. Dep’t of Highways, 16 Ct. Cl. 103 (1986). In the instant case, the Court is of the opinion that Respondent had, at the least, constructive notice of the condition of wet concrete in or near the construction zone on Interstate 77. Since the presence of wet concrete on the portion of the road open for travel through the construction zone created a hazard to the traveling public, the Court finds Respondent negligent and liable for the damages to Claimant’s vehicle.
      In view of the foregoing, it is the opinion of the Court of Claims that the Claimant should be awarded the sum of $500.00.
      Award of $500.00.
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 **