Gill v. Ohio Dep't of Rehab. & Corr.

Decision Date15 July 2022
Docket Number2021-00048JD
Citation2022 Ohio 3086
PartiesALI GILL Plaintiff v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION Defendant
CourtOhio Court of Claims

Sent to S.C. Reporter 9/2/22

DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE

GARY PETERSON MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

{¶1} Plaintiff, an inmate in the custody and control of defendant brings this action for negligence arising out of an incident where he fell and suffered injuries. The issues of liability and damages were not bifurcated, and the case proceeded to trial.

Findings of Fact

{¶2} On September 20, 2020, plaintiff proceeded to recreation at the Grafton Correctional Institution (GCI). Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, plaintiff was required to wear a face mask. Plaintiff sat down by a light pole near a pavilion in the recreation yard. Defendant's Exhibit B. After saying a prayer, plaintiff proceeded to leave the recreation yard. Plaintiff testified at trial that his cane got caught on some unlevel rocks that were about 4 inches higher than the surrounding elevation of the walkway. Plaintiff never complained to defendant about the walkways prior to this incident. Plaintiff maintained that his face mask obstructed his vision, which he described as impaired in one eye and blind in the other eye; however, plaintiff has not been determined to need a seeing eye dog or a cane for his vision. Plaintiff also stated that the obstruction that he tripped over was right by the pavilion but was obstructed by grass however, plaintiff admitted that he fell on the concrete and not on the grass. After plaintiff fell, he lost consciousness. Plaintiff thereafter was transported to a local hospital where he received medical treatment.

{¶3} Despite plaintiff's claim that he tripped on uneven rocks/concrete, it is more likely that his knee or hip gave out while he was walking. Indeed, plaintiff reported to the hospital staff that he was walking in the yard and his leg gave out causing him to fall backwards and hit his head. Defendant's Exhibit D, pg. 337. Plaintiff returned to the institution after about 5 hours and remained in defendant's quarantine unit for the next 21 days. On September 21, 2020, plaintiff reported to Jena Cottrell, a nurse practitioner at GCI, that his hip and knee gave out causing him to fall. Defendant's Exhibit D, pg. 391. Plaintiff acknowledged that he previously fell in 2019 due to an incident involving his blood pressure.

{¶4} Carl Taylor and Harry Barr, both inmates at GCI who know plaintiff, reported that the walkways at GCI need repair. Neither Taylor nor Barr saw plaintiff fall. Taylor and Barr both reported that the walkway around the pavilion was replaced in late 2021 or early 2022.

{¶5} James Snowden, a nurse at GCI, responded to plaintiff's fall. When Snowden arrived, plaintiff was lying on the ground on his back. Plaintiff was on the walkway between the basketball court and the yard, not by the pavilion as plaintiff claimed. Defendant's Exhibit B. Snowden attempted to wake plaintiff, but Snowden was unable to get plaintiff to respond. While Snowden was checking plaintiff's vitals, plaintiff woke up. At that point plaintiff began to respond. Plaintiff's blood pressure was high, his respirations were even, and his heartrate was a little high, but otherwise strong. After 20 minutes plaintiff began to move, but his blood pressure remained elevated.

{¶6} Myron Costin, the building construction superintendent at GCI oversees all construction projects at GCI. Costin and his team perform snow removal on all walkways during the winter as well as lawn mowing during the summer. Costin was never made aware of any heaving of the sidewalk or other defect in the recreation area where plaintiff fell. Costin explained that if one of the gators (utility vehicles) performing snow removal hit an upheaval of greater than 2 inches, it would cause the gator to come to a stop and that no such event ever occurred. The sidewalk in the recreation area was later replaced using covid relief money and that area was converted into an outdoor workout area. Defendant's Exhibit C.

Conclusions of Law and Analysis

{¶7} To prevail on a claim for negligence, plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that "(1) the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty, (2) the defendant breached that duty, and (3) the breach of the duty proximately caused the plaintiff's injury." Jenkins v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 12AP-787 2013-Ohio-5106, ¶ 6. "Typically under Ohio law, premises liability is dependent upon the injured person's status as an invitee, licensee, or a trespasser. * * * However, with respect to custodial relationships between the state and its inmates, the state has a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent prisoners in its custody from being injured by dangerous conditions about which the state knows or should know." Cordell v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 08AP-749, 2009-Ohio-1555, ¶ 6, citing Dean v. Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 97API12-1614, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 4451 (Sept. 24, 1998).

{¶8} "Although the state is not an insurer of the safety of its prisoners, once the state becomes aware of a dangerous condition in the prison, it is required to take the reasonable care necessary to make certain that the prisoner is not injured." Barnett v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 09AP-1186, 2010-Ohio-4737, ¶ 23. It is plaintiff's burden to show that defendant had notice of the condition of the walkway when he fell. See Powers v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 03AP-504, 2003-Ohio-6566, ¶ 10, citing Presley v. Norwood, 36 Ohio St.2d 29, 31, 303 N.E.2d 81 (1973); Manross v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 62 Ohio Misc.2d 273, 275, 598 N.E.2d 226 (Ct. of Cl.1991). "Notice may be actual or constructive, the distinction being the manner in which the notice is obtained rather than the amount of information obtained." Watson v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 11AP-606, 2012-Ohio-1017, ¶ 9. "Actual notice is notice obtained by actual communication to a party." Barnett at ¶ 23. "Constructive notice is that notice which the law regards as sufficient to give notice and is regarded as a substitute for actual notice." Hughes v. Ohio Dept. of Rehab. &Corr., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 09AP-1052, 2010-Ohio-4736,...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT