Opinion

Ducommun v. The Ohio Statehouse

  • 2011 Ohio 3152
Court
Ohio Court of Claims
Filed
Jun 7, 2011
Status
Published
On the bench
Weaver
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 32.2%

The opinion

[Cite as Ducommun v. The Ohio Statehouse, 2011-Ohio-3152.]

Court of Claims of Ohio

The Ohio Judicial Center

65 South Front Street, Third Floor

Columbus, OH 43215

614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263

www.cco.state.oh.us

SHARON S. DUCOMMUN

Plaintiff

v.

THE OHIO STATEHOUSE

Defendant

Case No. 2011-03111

Judge Clark B. Weaver Sr.

ENTRY GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

{¶ 1} On March 14, 2011, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment

pursuant to Civ.R. 56. Plaintiff has not filed a response. The motion is now before the

court for a non-oral hearing.

{¶ 2} Civ.R. 56(C) states, in part, as follows:

{¶ 3} “Summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings,

depositions, answers to interrogatories, written admissions, affidavits, transcripts of

evidence, and written stipulations of fact, if any, timely filed in the action, show that

there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law. No evidence or stipulation may be considered except as

stated in this rule. A summary judgment shall not be rendered unless it appears from

the evidence or stipulation, and only from the evidence or stipulation, that reasonable

minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is adverse to the party

against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, that party being entitled to

have the evidence or stipulation construed most strongly in the party’s favor.” See also

Case No. 2011-03111 -2- ENTRY

Gilbert v. Summit County, 104 Ohio St.3d 660, 2004-Ohio-7108, citing Temple v. Wean

United, Inc. (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 317.

{¶ 4} According to her complaint, on December 23, 2008, plaintiff sustained

personal injury when she tripped and fell on uneven granite steps located on the north

side of the Ohio Statehouse. In its motion, defendant asserts that plaintiff’s claim is

barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

{¶ 5} R.C. 2743.16(A) provides in relevant part:

{¶ 6} “[C]ivil actions against the state permitted by sections 2743.01 to 2743.20

of the Revised Code shall be commenced no later than two years after the date of

accrual of the cause of action or within any shorter period that is applicable to similar

suits between private parties.”

{¶ 7} Attached to defendant’s motion are certified copies of both plaintiff’s initial

complaint that was filed in Case No. 2009-03843, and the entry of dismissal of that

complaint. (Defendant’s Exhibits A and B, respectively.) Plaintiff’s initial complaint was

filed on April 6, 2009, and was dismissed without prejudice on January 20, 2010.

Pursuant to R.C. 2305.19,1 plaintiff had until January 20, 2011, to commence a new

action. However, plaintiff did not file her complaint in the instant case until February 28,

2011. Therefore, construing the facts most strongly in plaintiff’s favor, the court finds

that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that defendant is entitled to

summary judgment as a matter of law. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is

GRANTED and judgment is rendered in favor of defendant. Court costs are assessed

against plaintiff. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its

date of entry upon the journal.

1

R.C. 2305.19(A) states, in relevant part:

“In any action that is commenced or attempted to be commenced, if in due time a judgment for

the plaintiff is reversed or if the plaintiff fails otherwise than upon the merits, the plaintiff * * * may

commence a new action within one year after the date of the reversal of the judgment or the plaintiff’s

Case No. 2011-03111 -3- ENTRY

_____________________________________

CLARK B. WEAVER SR.

Judge

cc:

Amy S. Brown Sharon S. Ducommun

Velda K. Hofacker 6174 South Jackson Street

Assistant Attorneys General Centennnial, Colorado 80121

150 East Gay Street, 18th Floor

Columbus, Ohio 43215-3130

HTS/cmd/Filed June 7, 2011/To S.C. reporter June 22, 2011

failure otherwise than upon the merits or within the period of the original applicable statute of limitations,

whichever occurs later.”

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.