Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
3 of 95 DOCUMENTS
SHAWN THOMAS, et al., Appellants v. CITY OF WOOSTER, et al., Appellees
C. A. No. 07CA0059
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, WAYNE
COUNTY
2008-Ohio-1464; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278
city did not have to treat its roads in a certain way, nor
did its chosen method deviate from a standard of care or
breach a duty. The possible use of better methods did not
breach a standard of care or duty. As no standard existed
for road condition treatment, any related decision was
within its discretion, which it did not use wantonly or
recklessly as nothing showed it knew its conduct would
probably result in injury.
OUTCOME: The trial court's judgment was affirmed.
LexisNexis(R) Headnotes
Page 2
2008-Ohio-1464, *; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278, **1
Torts > Public Entity Liability > Liability > State Tort
Claims Acts > Construction & Interpretation
[HN6] The standard for showing wanton misconduct, so
as to hold a political subdivision liable, is high. Wanton
misconduct is the failure to exercise any care whatsoever.
Mere negligence is not converted into wanton misconduct
unless the evidence establishes a disposition to perversity
on the part of the tortfeasor. Such perversity must be
under such conditions that the actor must be conscious
that his conduct will in all probability result in injury.
Page 3
2008-Ohio-1464, *P2; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278, **1
Page 4
2008-Ohio-1464, *P7; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278, **5
corporation
does
not
have
the
responsibility
for
maintaining
or
inspecting the bridge." (Emphasis added).
[*P10] The trial
2744.02(B)(3) and found:
court
considered
R.C.
Page 5
2008-Ohio-1464, *P11; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278, **8
Page 6
2008-Ohio-1464, *P17; 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 1278, **12