Hall v. Wooster

Summary

The Ninth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed summary judgment in favor of the City of Wooster in Maribel Hall’s negligence action arising from a fall in a marked crosswalk. The court held that a marked crosswalk, defined as a portion of a roadway, falls within the public-roads exception to political-subdivision immunity under R.C. 2744.02(B)(3), and that the City failed to establish a statutory defense reinstating immunity. Hall’s second assignment of error was deemed moot.

Holdings

1. A marked crosswalk is a portion of a roadway under R.C. 4511.01(LL)(2) and therefore falls within the definition of a public road under R.C. 2744.01(H). Hall consequently established the public-roads exception to political-subdivision immunity under R.C. 2744.02(B)(3).
2. The City was not entitled to summary judgment because, after Hall established that the R.C. 2744.02(B)(3) exception applied, the City failed to establish that a defense to liability under R.C. 2744.03 reinstated immunity.
3. Hall's second assignment of error concerning genuine issues of material fact was moot because the court's resolution of the first assignment of error required reversal of the summary judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a marked crosswalk, defined by statute as a portion of a roadway, is part of a public road for purposes of the exception to political-subdivision immunity in R.C. 2744.02(B)(3).
2. Whether the City was entitled to summary judgment on statutory-immunity grounds when it did not establish a defense to liability under R.C. 2744.03.
3. Whether Hall's second assignment of error concerning disputed material facts was moot after resolution of the statutory-interpretation issue.

Disposition

reversed