Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Same law here: Ohio Revised Code: 4511.21 (speed limits)
(A) No person shall operate a motor vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar at a speed greater or less than is reasonable or proper, having due regard to the traffic, surface, and width of the street or highway and any other conditions, and no person shall drive any motor vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar in and upon any street or highway at a greater speed than will permit the person to bring it to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead
This is the legal issue the Ohio Supreme Court will rule on since there is no Ohio law/code 1. prohibiting the fortifying of the mailbox or 2. creating a duty to someone who may collide with such a fortified object.
Whether the homeowner has/had an ethical or moral responsibility given the 55 mph speed limit in front of his property is really a separate discussion around what 'should' have been done. As a legal matter around 'what was done' it appears the property owner doesn't have any liability (at least as decided through the first two lower courts).
If the accident had occurred in Maine it would be a completely different situation since Maine does have laws prohibiting fortified mailboxes (as pointed out earlier in the thread). For the moment that's not the case in Ohio - unless the Supreme Court (or Ohio's legislature) decides otherwise.
This is the legal issue the Ohio Supreme Court will rule on since there is no Ohio law/code 1. prohibiting the fortifying of the mailbox or 2. creating a duty to someone who may collide with such a fortified object.
Whether the homeowner has/had an ethical or moral responsibility given the 55 mph speed limit in front of his property is really a separate discussion around what 'should' have been done. As a legal matter around 'what was done' it appears the property owner doesn't have any liability (at least as decided through the first two lower courts).
If the accident had occurred in Maine it would be a completely different situation since Maine does have laws prohibiting fortified mailboxes (as pointed out earlier in the thread). For the moment that's not the case in Ohio - unless the Supreme Court (or Ohio's legislature) decides otherwise.
Are you sure that the speed limit was 55 mph? By the distance he was nearing the stop sign, he probably hit his first rumble strips. Again, a quick google maps satellite view can see the stop sign and that road is narrow and prohibits thru trucks. No way its 55mph.
This is the legal issue the Ohio Supreme Court will rule on since there is no Ohio law/code 1. prohibiting the fortifying of the mailbox or 2. creating a duty to someone who may collide with such a fortified object.
.
Wait, I need some clarification. According to what you say, the Ohio Supreme Curt will decide whether Ohio needs a law against fortified mailboxes. If they decide in the affirmative, the defendant will be guilty after the new law takes effect, even though no such law existed at the time of the accident?
Or the defendant will be found not guilty, but he'll be required to replace his mailbox with one in compliance with the new law?
Wait, I need some clarification. According to what you say, the Ohio Supreme Curt will decide whether Ohio needs a law against fortified mailboxes. If they decide in the affirmative, the defendant will be guilty after the new law takes effect, even though no such law existed at the time of the accident?
Or the defendant will be found not guilty, but he'll be required to replace his mailbox with one in compliance with the new law?
What I'm suggesting is the Ohio Supreme Court could find some implied homeowner duty (or liability) somewhere else in Ohio statues and would reverse the two lower court decisions which currently hold the homeowner blameless.
If this comes to pass the Ohio Supreme Court would be making 'case law'. What actually 'happens' is the OSC would remand the case back to the lower courts for them to adjudicate based on the OSC's decision/finding (and likely hold the homeowner liable based on the OSC's decision reversing the earlier courts).
Are you sure that the speed limit was 55 mph? By the distance he was nearing the stop sign, he probably hit his first rumble strips. Again, a quick google maps satellite view can see the stop sign and that road is narrow and prohibits thru trucks. No way its 55mph.
Earlier in the discussion I was thinking that the speed limit was 30 mph and argued that the homeowner should only be liable for max damage at 30 mph (and assumed the driver was speeding).
An earlier post had the link to the case documents: https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Cl...info/2020/1057. In one of those docs the speed limit is reported at 55 mph (and also reported by an earlier poster commenting on my 30 mph theory). I had to re-think my earlier position and for a while was thinking the homeowner should have put up a breakaway mailbox of some type given the 55 mph speed limit (to minimize potential unnecessary harm).
However, I then realized the homeowner has no such burden under the law and though it might be the 'right' thing to do (to prevent any unnecessary injury or harm) they are under no requirement to do so (unlike Maine where such a requirement does exist in their statutes).
So while I'm empathetic with the driver's situation, as a matter of Ohio law I agree with the two lower courts that there's no basis for homeowner liability. Maybe this case will cause the Ohio legislature to rethink the rules on 'roadside hazards' - at least on roads with 'highway' speed limits (even if they aren't 'highways').
Are you sure that the speed limit was 55 mph? By the distance he was nearing the stop sign, he probably hit his first rumble strips. Again, a quick google maps satellite view can see the stop sign and that road is narrow and prohibits thru trucks. No way its 55mph.
Wait, I need some clarification. According to what you say, the Ohio Supreme Curt will decide whether Ohio needs a law against fortified mailboxes. If they decide in the affirmative, the defendant will be guilty after the new law takes effect, even though no such law existed at the time of the accident?
Or the defendant will be found not guilty, but he'll be required to replace his mailbox with one in compliance with the new law?
No, they’ll rule whether or not a fortified mailbox is a breach of duty of reasonable care to the plaintiff, if the plaintiffs damages are a result of that breach, and if those damages were a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a fortified mailbox.
That's really narrow street and cars can fly by those homes at 55 MPH crazy.
It’s truly surprising that it’s 55mph when they list all the wrecks on that road within the last 10years due to excessive speed and narrow roadway.
What I'm suggesting is the Ohio Supreme Court could find some implied homeowner duty (or liability) somewhere else in Ohio statues and would reverse the two lower court decisions which currently hold the homeowner blameless.
If this comes to pass the Ohio Supreme Court would be making 'case law'. What actually 'happens' is the OSC would remand the case back to the lower courts for them to adjudicate based on the OSC's decision/finding (and likely hold the homeowner liable based on the OSC's decision reversing the earlier courts).
The main issue is to decide if Summary Judgment for the Burr's was proper, which the COA upheld.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
