• Super Lawyers
  • Lexis Nexis
  • Million Dollar Advocates Forum
  • Lead Counsel - Rated

People who have recently been involved in a Cleveland-area automobile accident frequently have questions regarding their legal rights. Some of these questions may involve the relationship between the criminal or traffic charges filed against the other driver and your rights to file a lawsuit for damages against that driver and others responsible for your injuries and damages.

For instance, is it really necessary to file a lawsuit against an at-fault driver if he or she was arrested or given a ticket as a result of the accident? Won’t the police take care of everything? If the police cite the driver for speeding or violating the law and the police report says that the other driver is at fault, may that finding be used to support your case against the other driver? Because these issues are often complex, you need to get advice from an experienced Ohio personal injury lawyer. Consider the following situation:

Facts of the Case

In a recent case decided by the Cuyahoga County  Court of Appeals, the defendant was a woman who was convicted by a trial court of the crime of leaving the scene of an accident. As part of her conviction and sentence, the trial court  ordered her to pay $2000 in restitution to compensate the victim of her crime for her damages. The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court had committed reversible error by entering a finding of guilty without setting forth any factual support for the court’s conclusion, even though she entered a plea of “no contest ( which legally means that she was admitting the facts, but not admitting her guilt).” Continue reading

There was a time when it was said that, ” You can’t sue City Hall”…or the State of Ohio. Just like a king, they were immune from suit. But that’s not always the case today.

This idea of sovereign immunity still holds true in some Ohio wrongful death and personal injury cases. Although our state government has carved out  exceptions to the general rule against holding the government liable in a negligence case, immunity still applies in some cases. (That said, even if immunity is waived, it is worth noting that there is likely to be a limitation of some sort, such as a cap on the amount of money damages recoverable by the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed against the government.) A governmental entity like a city may be sued for its negligence in performing  what are called proprietary functions, but not for so-called governmental functions.

Facts of the Case

The plaintiff in a recent appellate case from Stark County was the administrator of the estate of a woman who died after being struck by two automobiles while using a crosswalk to walk across a five-lane road as she walked to the store. The administrator sued the drivers of the automobiles, as well as the city in which the accident occurred, claiming that the woman’s wrongful death was due to the motorists’ as well as the City’s negligence. After the motorists reached a settlement with the Estate of the woman, the city filed a motion for summary judgment asking the court to dismiss the case against the city. Continue reading

Being involved in a Cleveland automobile accident can  be  complicated enough without getting in the middle of a fight among multiple insurance companies about which one should pay for the damages you’ve suffered as a result of the accident.Unfortunately, when this happens, one or more insurance companies deny responsibility and point fingers at the other(s). Meanwhile, you,   the injured person, receives nothing until the case is concluded, sometimes years later.

Facts of the Case

In a case recently considered by Ohio’s Eighth District Court of Appeals( Cuyahoga County) , the plaintiff was  injured in 2011 while traveling from Akron to Mayfield Heights. He was  a passenger riding in a car driven and owned by someone with whom the plaintiff had a business relationship. In fact, they were both involved in the same businesses. The defendant driver was scheduled to make a business presentation, and the plaintiff went along “out of curiosity.” In short, he wasn’t acting as an employee at the time of the accident, which happened after the defendant hit a patch of ice and lost control of his vehicle.

Continue reading

Because of negligent motorists and truck drivers,  riding a motorcycle is dangerous enough. But sometimes riding a bike in Ohio  is  made even more dangerous by hazards created by construction and maintenance crews, or even the by the municipality itself. While those who negligently hurt others  are generally accountable for the harm they cause, when the damage is caused by a city or its officials,  this is not always so. In a recent Dayton area motorcycle accident case recently considered by Ohio’s Second District appellate court, the defendant city was able to escape paying for the damage it caused.


The defendants were a city and its service director. Because of their status as a governmental entity and governmental employee, the court ultimately ruled that they were protected from the plaintiff’s negligence lawsuit by so-called sovereign immunity.

Facts of the Case

In the case, the plaintiff was a motorcyclist who was injured when a vehicle going in the opposite direction lost control and hit a median that had been constructed by the defendant city and overseen by the defendant service director as part of an “entryway enhancement project.” Debris from the accident struck the plaintiff,  throwing him to the pavement, causing  serious injury. Significantly, while the accident occurred in 2014,  the construction project was begun in 2009; another motorist struck the median in 2010, also sending debris into the oncoming lane. So the City was aware of the hazard and the problem. Continue reading

Timeliness can be  very important in any  lawsuit. In a Cleveland car  accident or truck  accident case, failure to follow  the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure and the Ohio Revised Code  with regard to filing deadlines, submission of pleadings, briefs and other documents  can lead to  a harsh result in court.

In some situations, it may be possible to have a trial court’s judgment based on a procedural ruling set aside, but this is the exception rather than the rule. The best course of action is to speak to a qualified attorney early so that you can understand your legal rights and avoid the potential pitfalls of the litigation process.

Facts of the Case

When an insurance company pays its policy holder for damages he or she suffered as a result of an accident caused by someone else, the insurance company often has the right to recover from the wrongdoer, or tortfeasor, as she is known, the amount that it paid to its insured. This is known as subrogation. The plaintiff in a recent  case was an insurance company that filed suit against the defendant motorist, asserting its subrogation rights and claiming that the motorist had to reimburse the insurance company for monies it had paid out to its insured on account of an accident allegedly caused when defendant negligently crossed the center line and struck the insured’s vehicle. According to the insurance company, its insured was seriously injured in the crash and suffered some $262,555 in damages. Continue reading

When we think of Ohio car accidents, we usually think of a crash between two cars, cars and a truck, or even a motorcyle and a car. But sometimes, it’s the roadway itself or the signs which are at fault When the negligence of an Ohio city, county or even the State of Ohio causes a crash, those whose lives are affected by it may have a right to seek compensation by filing a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit. Unless, of course, the driver was more at fault than the roadway design or maintenance. This is called comparative  negligence in Ohio.Of course, the defendant(s) in such cases often fight hard against being held responsible, sometimes asking the trial court to order “summary judgment,” a legal tool that claims that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgement as a matter of law. If granted by the judge, this effectively ends the lawsuit before the plaintiff has an opportunity to present his or her side of the case to the jury. It is up to the trial court to determine whether the plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence to proceed to trial.

Facts of the Case

In a recent appellate case arising from an automobile accident in Lorain County, Ohio, the plaintiffs were the parents of three teenagers who died when their car went airborne after it crossed over a railroad track. The parents sued the defendant townships, which bordered the road on which the teens were driving prior to their death.

A typical Cleveland car accident lawsuit involves a motorist’s claim that another driver acted negligently, by, for exmple, running a stop sign, speeding or failing to yield the right of way, causing a crash. Sometimes, however, there are other claims against defendants who were not drivers actually involved in the accident.

For example, a recent appellate case involved a driver’s claims against a city and others whom she claimed  were at fault for an accident that happened when she ran a stop sign that was obscured by foliage.

Facts of the Case

Many people labor under the falsehood that, if liability is clear in an Ohio automobile accident case, it will be easy to reach a fair settlement with the at-fault party’s insurance company. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case. It is not unusual for an insurance company to go to great lengths to avoid paying a claim – even when liability is clear.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case appealed to the Court of Appeals of Ohio for the Eighth Appellate District, the plaintiff was a woman who sought compensation for damages arising from an automobile accident. In her small claims court complaint, she stated that the accident happened in 2014 but involved her 2015 model year vehicle. The defendant driver moved for judgment on the pleadings, claiming that the two-year statute of limitations contained in Ohio Revised Code § 2305.10 precluded the plaintiff’s claim. The trial court judge agreed and granted the defendant’s motion.

Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion for relief from the judgment on the pleadings in favor of the defendant, asserting that she had inadvertently included the wrong date on her complaint. The defendant objected to the plaintiff’s motion for relief, but the trial court allowed the plaintiff to amend her complaint to allege that the accident occurred in 2015, not 2014 (thus saving her claim from dismissal under the statute of limitations). The defendant appealed. Continue reading

Thousands of Ohio car accidents occur every year. While not every crash results in litigation, a significant number do. When this happens, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove that the defendant acted negligently, which means that he or she failed to act in a reasonably prudent manner and that this was the proximate cause of the accident.

Once a trial  court enters a final judgment in favor of the winning party, the other side may appeal the trial court’s ruling. The party appealing the lower court’s decision has the burden of convincing the appellate court that a mistake was made, as a matter of law and that he or she is entitled to relief from the trial court’s judgment, often in the form of a new trial.

Just as there are rules and procedures that must be followed in a trial court, there are multiple requirements that must be met in order to be successful on appeal , some of which have nothing to do with the merits of the case.

Continue reading

There are many dangers on our roadways, any one of which could result in a serious Ohio truck accident in just a few moments’ time. When an injured person can prove that the defendant breached a duty of care owed to him or her and that this was the proximate cause of damages such as medical expenses, lost earnings, and pain and suffering, the injured person may be entitled to monetary compensation.

Sometimes, however, a defendant may have what is called an “affirmative defense” that effectively excuses his or her actions, at least in the eyes of the law. But the party claiming that affirmative defense has the burden of proof, so whether the  defendant is entitled to an affirmative defense is often a very hotly contested issue.

Facts of the Case