Opinion

Braun v. Toledo Corr. Inst.

  • 2011 Ohio 3857
Court
Ohio Court of Claims
Filed
Apr 21, 2011
Status
Published
On the bench
Borchert
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 32.2%

The opinion

[Cite as Braun v. Toledo Corr. Inst., 2011-Ohio-3857.]

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

JEFFREY R. BRAUN

Plaintiff

v.

TOLEDO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

Defendant

Case No. 2010-11676-AD

Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert

MEMORANDUM DECISION

FINDINGS OF FACT

{¶ 1} On November 5, 2010, plaintiff, Jeffrey R. Braun, an inmate formerly

incarcerated at defendant's Toledo Correctional Institution ("ToCI"), filed this action

alleging several items of his personal property were lost while under the control of ToCI

staff. Plaintiff explained he was transferred to segregation on April 6, 2010, and his

personal property was packed and sent to storage incident to the transfer. Plaintiff

pointed out he regained possession of his property in July 2010, and discovered the

following items were missing: one KTV digital color TV, Koss headphones, Sony CD

player, Masey Kool Junior fan, Coby AC/DC adapter, and a clip-on lamp.

{¶ 2} Plaintiff has alleged his property was lost or stolen as a proximate cause

of negligence on the part of ToCI personnel in handling his property. Plaintiff noted he

was not present during the pack-up of his property but insisted that all of the listed

property was located in his locked cell prior to his transfer to segregation. Plaintiff filed

this complaint seeking to recover $311.62 the total replacement cost of the listed

property. Payment of the filing fee was waived.

{¶ 3} Plaintiff submitted an invoice for the purchase of Koss headphones, a CD

player, and a KTV television set, dated February 12, 2008.

{¶ 4} Defendant contended plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to

establish he delivered Koss headphones, a CD player, a fan, an adapter, and a clip-on

lamp, into the custody of ToCI personnel incident to a transfer from the general

population to a segregation unit. Defendant disputed plaintiff’s assertion he actually

possessed the listed property with the exception of the KTV television set on April 6,

2010, when he was transferred to segregation. Defendant acknowledged Corrections

Officer Mel Brown confirmed that he packed up plaintiff’s television but the other

claimed items were not present in plaintiff’s cell during the pack up. Defendant denied

any of plaintiff’s property, with the exception of the television set, was lost as a

proximate result of negligence on the part of defendant.

{¶ 5} Plaintiff filed a response suggesting defendant either fabricated or

improperly altered the pack-up sheet dated April 6, 2010. In addition, plaintiff seeks an

order from the court prohibiting defendant from using any monies awarded as

reimbursement for outstanding court costs.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

{¶ 6} The credibility of witnesses and the weight attributable to their testimony

are primarily matters for the trier of fact. State v. DeHass (1967), 10 Ohio St. 2d 230, 39

O.O. 2d 366, 227 N.E. 2d 212, paragraph one of the syllabus. The court is free to

believe or disbelieve, all or any part of each witness's testimony. State v. Antill (1964),

Case No. 2006-03532-AD -3- MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case No. 2006-03532-AD -3- MEMORANDUM DECISION

176 Ohio St. 61, 26 O.O. 2d 366, 197 N.E. 2d 548. In the instant action, the trier of fact

does not find the statements offered by plaintiff concerning the delivery and subsequent

loss of his property, with the exception of the television set, to be particularly

persuasive.

{¶ 7} This court in Mullett v. Department of Correction (1976), 76-0292-AD, held

that defendant does not have the liability of an insurer (i.e., is not liable without fault)

with respect to inmate property, but that it does have the duty to make "reasonable

attempts to protect, or recover" such property.

{¶ 8} Although not strictly responsible for a prisoner's property, defendant had at

least the duty of using the same degree of care as it would use with its own property.

Henderson v. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility (1979), 76-0356-AD.

{¶ 9} Plaintiff has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence,

that he suffered a loss and that this loss was proximately caused by defendant's

negligence. Barnum v. Ohio State University (1977), 76-0368-AD.

{¶ 10} Negligence on the part of defendant has been shown in respect to the

issue of property protection. Billups v. Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

(2001), 2000-10634-AD.

{¶ 11} As trier of fact, this court has the power to award reasonable damages

based on evidence presented. Sims v. Southern Ohio Correctional Facility (1988), 61

Ohio Misc. 2d 239, 577 N.E. 2d 160.

{¶ 12} Damage assessment is a matter within the function of the trier of fact.

Litchfield v. Morris (1985), 25 Ohio App. 3d 42, 25 OBR 115, 495 N.E. 2d 462.

Reasonable certainty as to the amount of damages is required, which is that degree of

certainty of which the nature of the case admits. Bemmes v. Pub. Emp. Retirement

Sys. Of Ohio (1995), 102 Ohio App. 3d 782, 658 N.E. 2d 31.

{¶ 13} The standard measure of damages for personal property is market value.

McDonald v. Ohio State Univ. Veterinary Hosp. (1994), 67 Ohio Misc. 2d 40, 644 N.E.

2d 750.

{¶ 14} Evidence has shown plaintiff’s television set was more than two years old

when the incident forming the basis of this claim occurred. Based on the fact the

television set constituted depreciable property, the court finds plaintiff has suffered

damages in the amount of $100.00. See Martin v. Ohio Dep't Rehab. & Corr., Ct. of Cl.

No. 2009-03151-AD, 2009-Ohio-6364.

{¶ 15} R.C. 5120.133 governs the transmission of funds from an inmate account

to satisfy court-ordered payment of court costs. Ohio Adm. Code 5120-5-03 provides

the mechanism for the collection of court-ordered costs from inmates. The court of

claims lacks jurisdiction to order defendant to refrain from following the mandates

promulgated by another court. See Abdussatar v. Mansfield Corr. Inst., Ct. of Cl. No.

2007-09429-AD, 2008-Ohio-3419, State v. Brown, 156 Ohio App. 3d 120, 2004-Ohio-

558.

Case No. 2006-03532-AD -5- MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case No. 2006-03532-AD -5- MEMORANDUM DECISION

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

JEFFREY R. BRAUN

Plaintiff

v.

TOLEDO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION

Defendant

Case No. 2010-11676-AD

Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert

ENTRY OF ADMINISTRATIVE

DETERMINATION

Having considered all the evidence in the claim file and, for the reasons set forth

in the memorandum decision filed concurrently herewith, judgment is rendered in favor

of plaintiff in the amount of $100.00. Court costs are assessed against defendant.

DANIEL R. BORCHERT

Deputy Clerk

Entry cc:

Jeffrey R. Braun, #504-477 Gregory C. Trout, Chief Counsel

P.O. Box 45699 Department of Rehabilitation

Lucasville, Ohio 45699 and Correction

770 West Broad Street

Columbus, Ohio 43222

SJM/laa

3/24

Filed 4/21/11

Sent to S.C. reporter 8/5/11

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.