News

  The Cuyahoga River was used as a trade route for thousands of years by the American Indians, who referred to it as the “Ka-ih-ogh-ha” or crooked river.

Notable Cases

Franklin C.P. No. 14 CV 005498 (July 31, 2015)

Plaintiff allegedly suffered a severe spinal cord injury after an eleven-year old child struck her with a go-kart during a race with other children on a private backyard go-kart track.  Plaintiff was standing near the edge of the track taking pictures of the children when this one child driver lost control.  Plaintiff filed suit against the couple who invited plaintiff to the event, the child, the child’s parents, the track owners, and several companies which were alleged to have been involved in the track design or construction.

Adam E. Carr successfully argued that this go-kart race was a recreational activity and thus, the plaintiff’s claim was barred by the doctrine of primary assumption of risk under Gentry v. Craycraft, 101 Ohio St. 3d 141, 2004-Ohio-379, 802 N.E.2d 1116.  At common law, a plaintiff’s assumption of the risk stood as an absolute bar to his recovery.  Anderson v. Ceccardi, 6 Ohio St. 3d 110, 451 N.E.2d 780 (1983).  With the enactment of former R.C. 2315.19, Ohio’s original comparative negligence statute, the defense of implied assumption of risk merged with the defense of contributory negligence.  Anderson at syllabus.  However, primary assumption of risk did not merge with contributory negligence.  Gallagher v. Cleveland Browns Football Co., 74 Ohio St. 3d 427, 431, 659 N.E.2d 1232 (1996).  Primary assumption of risk arises where the defendant owes no duty to the plaintiff.  It is a defense of extraordinary strength and it acts as a complete bar to a plaintiff’s recovery.  Gallagher at 431.

11th Dist. No. 2012-T-0096, 2013-Ohio-5817

Plaintiff had been transported to a local hospital following a near-drowning diving accident.  He alleged that substandard medical care rendered him a quadriplegic/tetraplegic.  Some of the medical defendants asserted a third-party complaint for contribution and indemnity against the property owners for the original injury, based on an alleged defect in the condition of the property.

Adam E. Carr successfully moved for a Civ. R. 12(B)(6) dismissal in the trial court and successfully defended the appeal.  No case has been found in American legal history in which a medical malpractice defendant was permitted to assert such a claim against the original tortfeasor.  The treating doctor “takes his victim as he finds him,” and is responsible for the consequences of his or her own malpractice, if any.  The treating doctor is not responsible for the original injury, but only to the extent, if any, that his substandard care made the injury worse.  This fundamental principle of tort law was affirmed.

N.D.Ohio No. 4:11-cv-01174

Adam E. Carr successfully defended a pre-teen girl and her parents in federal court. Our clients had been accused of bullying at school and cyberbullying on the internet. The plaintiff filed suit against our clients, plus ten other children, their parents, and the school district. The allegations against our clients were dismissed with prejudice during discovery, with no payment by our clients or their insurer.

The plaintiff and her mother appeared on the Dr. Phil show (aired twice) and 48 Hours. None of the defendants were interviewed on either program. Despite this, our client prevailed in court.

100 Ohio St. 3d 302, 2003-Ohio-5888, 798 N.E.2d 1077

Adam E. Carr represented the successful insurers in two of the companion cases to Westfield Ins. Co. v. Galatis, 100 Ohio St.3d 216, 2003-Ohio-5849, 799 N.E. 2d 179.  The Supreme Court of Ohio adopted one of Adam E. Carr’s arguments on insurance policy interpretation.  It was Galatis that ended the Scott-Pontzer phenomenon, which had driven some leading insurers out of the Ohio insurance market.

Appellate Cases

  • Carter v. Forestview Terrace, 8th Dist. No. 103165, 2016-Ohio-5229 (injury to residential tenant)
  • Schaefer v. Musil, 9th Dist. No. 27109, 2014-Ohio-1504 (definition of occurrence)
  • DeMarco v. Allstate, 8th Dist. No. 100192, 2014-Ohio-933 (insurer work product privilege in bad faith case)
  • Barker v. Emergency Professional Serv., Inc. 11th Dist. No. 2012-T-0096, 2013-Ohio-5817; 11th Dist. Nos. 2012-T-0097 & 2013-T-0026, 2013-Ohio-5818; 11th Dist. No. 2012-T-0098, 2013-Ohio-5819; in related appeal, 11th Dist. No. 2013-T-0018, 2014-Ohio-1368 (quadriplegic after diving accident)
  • Fuline v. Green, 9th Dist. No. 26586, 2013-Ohio-2171, on prior appeal, 9th Dist. Nos. 25704 & 25936, 2012-Ohio-2749 (attorney fee award)
  • Dixon v. O’Brien, 7th Dist. No. 12 MA 19, 2013-Ohio-1429, on prior appeal, 7th Dist. No. 09 MA 123, 2011-3399 (motion for new trial; special rules for appeal in magistrate trial)
  • Kish v Scrocco, 7th Dist. No. 11 MA 197, 2013-Ohio-899 (wrongful death premises case)
  • Harris-Coker v. Abraham, 9th Dist. No. 26053, 2012-Ohio-4135 (negligence per se in premises case)
  • Shankle v. Egner, 5th Dist. Nos. 2011 CA 00121 and 2011 CA 00143, 2012-Ohio-2027 (default judgment and service of process)
  • Jaronovic v. Iacofano, 11th Dist. App. No. 2011-L-070, 2012-Ohio-1581 (premises case)
  • Suggs v. Looby, 5th Dist. No. 2011 CA 00023, 2011-Ohio-4533 (motion for new trial)
  • Hartzell v. Breneman, 7th Dist. No. 10 MA 67, 2011-Ohio-2472 (physician-patient privilege)

Trial Court Cases

Lorain C.P. No. 15 CV 186185 (June 21, 2016)

$14,000 jury verdict for plaintiff involved in significant motor vehicle accident.  Plaintiff’s vehicle was totaled and defendant’s vehicle sustained $26,000 in property damage.  Plaintiff’s injuries consisted of neck pain and bulging discs.  Plaintiff’s treatment lasted multiple years and included physical therapy.  Liability was not in dispute.

Cuyahoga C.P. CV-14-832847

Eric K. Grinnell successfully argued to overturn the foreclosure and sheriff’s sale of his client’s home due to insufficient service of process.

Summit C.P. CV-2013-08-3707

Eric K. Grinnell successfully argued that the State of Ohio Bureau of Workers Compensation was not entitled to subrogation to collect monies paid to co-defendant Verlinger, a BWC beneficiary.

  • Williams v. Alvarez, Williams C.P. No. 16 CI 000028 (Feb. 22, 2017) (injury to social guest) Stefou v. Hill, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CV-16-857365 (Jan. 10, 2017) (auto insurance definition of insured person)
  • Shelton v. Encompass, Summit C.P. CV 2015-11-5304 (Aug. 1, 2016) (value dispute not bad faith)
  • Carson v. Cavoulas, Mahoning C.P. No. 13 CV 1927 (Sept. 30, 2014) (right-of-way case)
  • Keough v. Trissel, Stark C.P. No. 2013CV02594 (May 22, 2014) (no punitive damages from alcohol consumption without evidence of impairment)
  • Nalbach v. Sharp, Trumbull C.P. No. 2012 CV 1098 (Nov. 19, 2013) (restrictive definition of insured challenged by different auto insurer)
  • Kizer v. Allstate, Lucas C.P. No. CI2010 05653 (June 24, 2011) (no insurable interest in vehicle)
  • Bossier v. Bridgewater Place, Summit C.P. CV 2010-11-7713 (June 15, 2011) (injunction ordering homeowner to remove fence which violated deed restrictions)

Lectures

Mr. Carr has given the following recent lectures:

  • Claim File Do’s and Don’ts, Ohio Joint Insurance Fraud Seminar (Columbus, OH, March 2017)
  • Challenging A Personal Injury Damages Award, Clear Law Institute (online seminar, July 14, 2016)
  • Reservation of Rights and the Duty to Defend, Claims & Litigation Management Alliance (Cleveland, OH, March 2016)
  • Litigation 101, Claims & Litigation Management Alliance (Cleveland, OH, August 2015)
  • The Rules of Evidence: A Practical Toolkit, National Business Institute (Youngstown, OH, April 2015)