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
JAMES TREOLA
VS.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(CC-14-1367)
     Claimant appeared pro se.
     C. Brian Matko, Attorney at Law, for Respondent.
     PER CURIAM:
      Claimant brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when his 2009 Chevrolet Silverado struck a foreign object on Woodward Drive/Route 22 near Charleston, Kanawha County. Route 22 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 10:00 a.m. on August 17. 2014. At the time of the incident, Claimant was driving to his home when he encountered another vehicle coming down the hill in the opposite direction. Route 22 is a narrow, two-lane road, and the other vehicle was driving over the middle line, which forced Claimant to move his vehicle to the side of the road to pass. When Claimant moved over, his vehicle struck a large piece of cement and pipe lying beside the road. Claimant testified that he had seen the object in that particular place prior to the incident, and that after he contacted Respondent following the incident, the object was moved a few feet away from the road.
      As a result of this incident, Claimant’s vehicle sustained damage to a tire and rim in the amount of $323.94. Claimant’s insurance declaration sheet indicates that his collision deductible was $500.00 at the time of the incident.
      It is Claimant’s position that Respondent knew or should have known about the object on Route 22 which created a hazardous condition to the traveling public, and that Respondent was negligent in failing to properly maintain the road and provide proper warning to the traveling public of a known hazardous condition prior to the incident.
      The position of the Respondent is that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the object on Route 22 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 object on Route 22, and failed to take adequate steps to protect or warn travelers prior to this incident. Since the object 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 $323.94.
      Award of $323.94.
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 **