|Volume Number: 29
|Opinion Issued February 14, 2013|
|DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS|
Macel E. Rhodes, Attorney at Law, for Claimant.
Andrew F. Tarr, 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. Respondent is responsible for the maintenance of West Virginia Route 55 in Hardy County, West Virginia.
2. On or around September 14, 2008, Wesley Parmer was operating his motorcycle on West Virginia Route 55 in Hardy County, West Virginia, when he lost control of his vehicle because of loose gravel on the roadway in an area of the road where Respondent had recently performed berm work.
3. Claimant alleges on the day of the accident that Respondent had at least constructive notice of the loose gravel in the road, that Respondent had failed to remove the loose gravel from the road and that Respondent had failed to provide appropriate signage close enough to the location of the accident to advise the traveling public of the condition of the road at that location.
4. Under specific facts and circumstances of this claim and for purposes of settlement of said claim, Respondent does not dispute the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 of this stipulation.
5. Wesley Parmer was injured as a result of the accident and required medical treatment for his injuries.
6. Both the Claimant and Respondent believe that in this particular incident and under these particular circumstances that an award of One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($125,000.00) would be a fair and reasonable amount to settle this claim.
7. The parties to this claim agree that the total sum of One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($125,000.00) to be paid by Respondent to the Claimant in Claim No. CC-10-0271 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 West Virginia Route 55 on the date of this incident; that the negligence of Respondent was the proximate cause of the damages sustained by Claimant; and that the amount of damages agreed to by the parties is fair and reasonable. Thus, Claimant may make a recovery.
It is the opinion of the Court of Claims that the Claimant should be awarded the sum of $125,000.00 on this claim.
Award of $125,000.00.