The decedant was 44 years old and leaves a wife and 8 children. He was driving his SUV with one daughter as a passenger. She survived. According to the police, the decedant was Westbound and the tanker was Southbound. The SUV broad-sided the tanker and it exploded. Happened at 8:40pm and traffic was light. Issues facing the liability will be “last clear chance doctrine” and “proper lookout entering an intersection”. From the physiology, the tanker appears to have had control of the intersection and the SUV would have been traveling at a high rate of speed.
Does anyone know whether the light actually malfunctioned, and if so, what was the cause of the malfunction. Also, how long was it malfunctioning? Did it show 2 green lights, or no lights at all for either direction? These may be critical questions for suits against a governmental agency.
she needs to have a strong case to show that the ohio dot is at fault. even then, if it was in the city where the indicident happened, then it would be the city and not the oh dot. here’s the question, why did it take 2 yrs to make the claim that the city was at fault? where’s the proof that it happened? sounds fishy to me. i understand she is now raising the kids on her own and that probably he was at fault, because i did not read that she was suing the tanker company. so that probably shows more than likely that he was at fault. sounds to me, that he was not paying attention. is it possible, that he was distracted by the surviving kid in the vehicle?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
The decedant was 44 years old and leaves a wife and 8 children. He was driving his SUV with one daughter as a passenger. She survived. According to the police, the decedant was Westbound and the tanker was Southbound. The SUV broad-sided the tanker and it exploded. Happened at 8:40pm and traffic was light. Issues facing the liability will be “last clear chance doctrine” and “proper lookout entering an intersection”. From the physiology, the tanker appears to have had control of the intersection and the SUV would have been traveling at a high rate of speed.
Does anyone know whether the light actually malfunctioned, and if so, what was the cause of the malfunction. Also, how long was it malfunctioning? Did it show 2 green lights, or no lights at all for either direction? These may be critical questions for suits against a governmental agency.
she needs to have a strong case to show that the ohio dot is at fault. even then, if it was in the city where the indicident happened, then it would be the city and not the oh dot. here’s the question, why did it take 2 yrs to make the claim that the city was at fault? where’s the proof that it happened? sounds fishy to me. i understand she is now raising the kids on her own and that probably he was at fault, because i did not read that she was suing the tanker company. so that probably shows more than likely that he was at fault. sounds to me, that he was not paying attention. is it possible, that he was distracted by the surviving kid in the vehicle?
Being cynical I fully expect a sympathy vote.
It does seem odd that it took two years to bring suit and that she’s suing ODOT. Sounds to me like she’s simply fishing for pockets.
The death is tragic, but there’s nothing evident currently that would place the blame anywhere but on the deceased. But I may be missing something.
The investigation could have easily taken two years.
Regardless how long it takes, a loved-one I don’t doubt their motives.
I’m guessing her grief may be subsiding or bearable from the loss of her husband, may he rest in peace.
My heart goes out to her.