Legal Opinion

Garland v. Ohio Department of Transportation

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided January 3, 1990No. (No. 88-1556PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.

This case raises the question of whether the state is entitled to a reasonable time frame in which to implement a purely discretionary decision regarding traffic control. The court of appeals held that ODOT’s June 9,1981 decision to install a six-phase traffic signal with protection for left turns was not a discretionary and planning function, and that ODOT’s immunity from tort liability therefore ceased with the initial determination in 1979 that a traffic signal should be installed at the intersection to replace the red and yellow flashing lights. This determination is erroneous. It would…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Reynolds v. StateOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Winwood v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Payne v. Broward CountySupreme Court of Florida · 1984

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Rhodus v. Ohio Department of TransportationOhio Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. Kniskern v. Township of SomerfordOhio Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Wallace v. Ohio Dept. of CommerceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Wallace v. Ohio Department of CommerceOhio Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Bradley v. Dept. of Rehab. Correction, 07ap-506 (12-31-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API