Komyatti v. Consol. City of Indianapolis-Marion Cnty.
| Decision Date | 13 May 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. 49A04–1209–CT–445.,49A04–1209–CT–445. |
| Citation | 987 N.E.2d 548 |
| Parties | Paul KOMYATTI, Jr., Appellant–Plaintiff, v. The CONSOLIDATED CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS–MARION COUNTY and Citizens Energy Group, Appellees–Defendants. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from the Marion Superior Court; The Honorable Timothy W. Oakes, Judge; Cause No. 49D13–1009–CT–41889.
Richard A. Waples, Waples & Hanger, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Beth A. Garrison Deputy Chief Litigation Counsel, Office of Corporation Counsel, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellee, City of Indianapolis.
Ryan A. Cook, Citizens Energy Group, Brian W. Welch, Alex E. Gude, Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee, Citizens Energy Group.
One afternoon in June 2010, Paul Komyatti, Jr., rode his bicycle to a nearby Indianapolis bar that he had biked to approximately three times in the last thirty days. He had also traveled that route in a vehicle approximately six times during that time span and had seen potholes in the street each time. He stayed at the bar for approximately three hours and drank at least two twelve- or sixteen-ounce beers.
It was still light out when Komyatti started biking home on the left side of the street, in violation of Indiana law. He was traveling at least twenty miles per hour on a downhill slope when he saw two vehicles approaching him near a railroad overpass. He decided to move left as far as he could and ride through a puddle beneath the overpass. According to Komyatti, the puddle concealed a pothole that stopped his bike. He fell forward and lost consciousness. Komyatti, who was not wearing a helmet, suffered severe facial injuries and was transported to a hospital. A blood test indicated that his blood alcohol concentration (“BAC”) was 137 milligrams per deciliter (“mg/dL”), which is 57 mg/dL over the legal limit for operating a vehicle.
Komyatti sued the Consolidated City of Indianapolis–Marion County (“the City”) and Citizens Energy Group (“Citizens”), which stored coke on its property near the railroad overpass.1 He alleged that the City was negligent in failing to maintain the street in a reasonably safe condition and that Citizens was negligent in allowing coke to escape its property and contribute to the formation of potholes. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that Komyatti's conduct was contributorily negligent as a matter of law and that his violation of Indiana traffic statutes was contributorily negligent per se. Citizens also filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that it did not breach any duty to Komyatti and was not a proximate cause of his injuries. The trial court summarily granted both summary judgment motions.
On appeal, Komyatti contends that the trial court erred in granting the summary judgment motions. We conclude that Komyatti's conduct was negligent as a matter of law and was a proximate cause of his injuries. As even a slight degree of negligence on a plaintiff's part, if it proximately contributed to his claimed damages, will completely bar recovery for a tort claim against a governmental entity regardless of any negligence on its part, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the City. Also, because it is undisputed that Komyatti's injuries did not result from any dangerous activities conducted by Citizens on its property, we conclude as a matter of law that Citizens did not breach its duty to Komyatti as a member of the public traveling on Prospect Street and therefore affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Citizens.
The designated evidence indicates that at approximately 5:00 p.m. on June 19, 2010, Komyatti left his home on Southern Avenue in Indianapolis and began pedaling his ten-speed bicycle toward a bar approximately ten to fifteen minutes away. He biked east to Meridian Street and then took the Pleasant Run bike trail over to Prospect Street. While biking east on Prospect Street, he rode on the south side of the street but may have moved to the north side of the street at some point. He had biked to the bar approximately three times in the past thirty days and had always taken the same route. He had also traveled that stretch of Prospect Street in a vehicle approximately six times in the past thirty days and had seen potholes in the street each time.
Komyatti turned south onto Southeastern Avenue and arrived at the bar. According to Komyatti, he drank two twelve- or sixteen-ounce glasses of beer while at the bar. At approximately 8:00 p.m., Komyatti left the bar. According to Komyatti, he did not feel intoxicated and believed that he was “of sound mind ... to operate a bicycle.” Appellant's App. at 133. According to bar manager Don Noe, who had “plenty of experience with people who have had too much alcohol to drink and who become impaired as a result,” Komyatti Id. at 289. When Komyatti rode away from the bar, “he seemed to be in complete control of the bicycle.” Id. Noe “was not the least bit concerned about [Komyatti] and his ability to safely ride his bicycle when he left.” Id. at 290. According to Komyatti's girlfriend, Jenny Sterling, Komyatti called her before he left the bar and told her that he had consumed “two buckets of beer.” Id. at 191. 3 Sterling could “[n]ot really” tell that Komyatti had been drinking; his words “weren't slurred,” and she believed that he was “fine to ride his bicycle home.” Id.
The sun had not yet set when Komyatti began to retrace his route homeward. From Southeastern Avenue, Komyatti turned west onto Prospect Street and rode on the south (left) side of the street, facing traffic, in violation of Indiana law. Ind.Code §§ 9–21–11–2, 9–21–8–2.4 As he neared a railroad overpass, he saw two eastbound vehicles coming toward him in his lane. At that point, Komyatti was “on a downward slope” traveling “at least 20 miles an hour.” Appellant's App. at 170. He moved left as far as he could to avoid the oncoming traffic and decided to ride “right into [a] puddle of water” beneath the overpass. Id. at 168.5 According to Komyatti, the puddle concealed a pothole, which caused the bicycle to stop. Komyatti, who was not wearing a helmet, fell forward off his bicycle and temporarily lost consciousness.
One of the oncoming motorists, Angela Watts, saw Komyatti fall when he was approximately two car lengths in front of her. After she passed him, she looked in her rearview mirror and saw that he was not moving. She got out of her car and walked back toward him. According to Watts, when she approached Komyatti, she “smelled alcohol coming from him.” Id. at 194. “The bicycle was still between his legs, and [she] saw that the tire of his bicycle was in a pothole that [she] could clearly see.” Id. She did “not recall there being any water near and/or in the pothole that would have prevented him from seeing the pothole.” Id.6 Watts called 911. Komyatti “kept trying to get up and leave the scene, telling [Watts and another motorist] that he was okay,” but they “repeatedly told him not to move—that the paramedics were on their way.” Id.
Komyatti suffered severe facial injuries as a result of his fall and was transported to Wishard Hospital, where his blood was drawn. His BAC measured 137 mg/dL, which is 57 mg/dL above the legal limit for operating a vehicle. Ind.Code § 9–30–5–1.7
On September 23, 2010, Komyatti filed a negligence complaint against the City and Citizens, which stored coke in a staging area on Prospect Street near the overpass. The complaint alleged that the City had failed to maintain Prospect Street in a reasonably safe condition. The complaint also alleged that Citizens had failed to contain coke on its property and that coke runoff and spillage had contributed to the formation of potholes beneath the overpass.
On March 5, 2012, the City and Citizens filed separate motions for summary judgment. In its motion, the City argued that it was entitled to summary judgment because Komyatti's “conduct was contributorily negligent as a matter of law.” Appellant's App. at 108. In its supporting brief, the City noted that contributory negligence is a complete bar to recovery in tort actions against governmental entities. The City also noted that Komyatti was familiar with the area where the accident occurred and that he
(1) was legally intoxicated at the time of his accident; (2) rode his bicycle on the wrong side of the street into oncoming traffic; (3) did not wear a helmet; (4) traveled “pretty fast”—at least twenty miles an hour on the downward slope of Prospect Street; and (5) did not stop his bicycle and move off the street to allow the oncoming cars to pass him.
Id. at 13. The City also argued that Komyatti's violation of Indiana traffic statutes was contributorily negligent per se.
In support of its motion, the City designated various evidence, including a report from John E. Pless, M.D., “a board certified Anatomic, Clinical and Forensic pathologist with 38 years [of] experience in the diagnosis of disease and injury.” Id. at 234. Dr. Pless had reviewed “police reports, emergency reports, medical records, and [Komyatti's deposition] concerning the circumstances surrounding” his fall. Id. Dr. Pless's report reads in pertinent part as follows:
[Komyatti's] blood alcohol concentration on admission to Wishard Hospital was 137 mg/dL. This is 57 mg/dL over the amount considered operating a vehicle while intoxicated. To achieve this level during a three-hour period of imbibing adjusting for an increased weight of 230 pounds he would have had to have ingested at least 6 (+ or –2) twelve-ounce beers before getting on his bicycle. This amount would clearly affect the ability of the average person. Some people are unconscious...
To continue reading
Request your trial