From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Department of Highway Safety

Court of Claims of Ohio
Mar 7, 1988
610 N.E.2d 624 (Ohio Misc. 1988)

Opinion

No. 85-10511.

Decided March 7, 1988.

Daniel M. Hunt, Francis E. Baumna and John Frazieh Jackson, for plaintiff.

Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr., Attorney General, and Elizabeth Tarpy Kerns, Assistant Attorney General, for defendant.


Plaintiff, Robert L. Jones, brought this action to recover damages resulting from his false arrest by officers of the Ohio State Highway Patrol.

On November 6, 1984, plaintiff was driving his tractor-trailer rig north-bound on Interstate 71 when he pulled off the highway to check on a potential tire leak. After making his check and while sitting in the parked rig, plaintiff was approached by Ohio State Highway Patrolman Dennis M. Nelson. Plaintiff was accused of being drunk, but was ordered to follow the officer and drive his rig to the nearest weigh station. Plaintiff was detained without a warrant or probable cause for approximately four hours.

Defendant admits liability for false arrest; therefore, the only issue before the court is damages.

When a person has been erroneously detained, the legal system has a responsibility to admit the mistake and diligently attempt to make the person whole. O'Neil v. State (1984), 13 Ohio App.3d 320, 322, 13 OBR 398, 400, 469 N.E.2d 1010, 1013.

Although there is no specific standard to be used in determining the amount of compensation owed to a person who has been wrongly confined by the police, previous cases provide some indication of the value that has been placed upon humiliation, deprivation of freedom, and injury to reputation. Id. at 323, 13 OBR at 401-402, 469 N.E.2d at 1014, citing Mouse v. Central Savings Trust Co. (1929), 120 Ohio St. 599, 167 N.E. 868; Kuhn v. McNeal (1931), 41 Ohio App. 485, 181 N.E. 153; Morgan v. B.F. Goodrich Co. (App. 1937), 23 Ohio Law Abs. 541; and Thomas v. F. R. Lazarus Co. (App. 1941), 40 Ohio Law Abs. 29, 57 N.E.2d 103. Essentially, any damages directly related to the erroneous detention are to be allowed in assessing damages resulting from a person's loss of liberty.

In the instant case, plaintiff did not make a claim for damages for personal injury. However, plaintiff alleges that he suffered a loss of earnings; such a claim stems from his impression that he had been discharged from his employment with Motor Convoy Company. The evidence indicates, however, that plaintiff returned to his employment on November 8, 1984, two days after the occurrence. The litigants agreed that said loss of earnings amount to $300.

Plaintiff contends that even though it was never shown he was intoxicated at the time of his detention, he suffered embarrassment when fellow coworkers called him a "drunk" as well as other disparaging names. As a result, plaintiff claims damages for emotional distress.

As a general rule, if emotional distress is the only legal consequence of defendant's tortious conduct, damages cannot be recovered. Morgan, supra, 23 Ohio Law Abs. at 543. However, the Morgan court held that emotional distress caused by defendant's affirmative tortious conduct, as opposed to negligent tortious conduct, is taken into account when defendant's conduct makes him liable for an invasion of any legally protected interest of another. This view was subsequently affirmed in O'Neil, supra.

As aforementioned, defendant has admitted to unlawfully restraining plaintiff during the incident, thereby depriving plaintiff of his protected interest in freedom of movement. Therefore, plaintiff's emotional distress shall be considered in determining damages due to defendant's tortious conduct.

Upon review of the record and the evidence, it is evident that the defendant's act was the proximate cause of plaintiff's loss of earnings and emotional distress. Therefore, it is the finding and judgment of this court that the plaintiff is entitled to damages in the amount of $750. This amount consists of $500 for the plaintiff, inclusive of $300 already determined as loss of earnings, and $250 in attorney fees. Accordingly, judgment is hereby rendered for the plaintiff in the aforesaid amount.

LEONARD J. STERN, J., retired, of the Supreme Court of Ohio, sitting by assignment.


Summaries of

Jones v. Department of Highway Safety

Court of Claims of Ohio
Mar 7, 1988
610 N.E.2d 624 (Ohio Misc. 1988)
Case details for

Jones v. Department of Highway Safety

Case Details

Full title:JONES v. DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY

Court:Court of Claims of Ohio

Date published: Mar 7, 1988

Citations

610 N.E.2d 624 (Ohio Misc. 1988)
610 N.E.2d 624

Citing Cases

Legg v. Ohio State Highway Patrol

Such conduct by Trooper Smith would appear to constitute well-intentioned advice but not words imposing…