Sunday, November 29, 2015

Rush v. City of Maple Heights case brief summary

Rush v. City of Maple Heights case brief
Ohio Supreme 1958

Posture: Defendant appealed a judgment for plaintiff which was affirmed in court of appeals and Supreme Court. Plaintiff now wants to bring a second which resulted in her winning in trial court. Ohio supreme reverses that second judgment, says it was barred by res judicata. 
Facts: Plaintiff injured in fall from motorcycle, sues defendant city for negligence in maintaining its streets and that negligence is proximate cause of plaintiff’s damages to property, not personal injuries. Plaintiff wins property case and brings a second trial for personal injuries sustained. She wins personal injuries claim as well for damages but issue of negligence was barred. 

Reasoning: Injuries to person and property are different causes of action and that recovery for property is no bar to recovery for personal injury unless plaintiff lost in first action. However, other state court’s held that one wrongful act can be the basis of one action; all damages sustained must be sued for in one suit and it seems wrong to allow two different amounts to be recovered for. The court, instead, decided to overrule a previous decision and say that one cause of action makes a lot more sense than two for same tort. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.