OPINION {¶ 1} THIS IS AN ACCELERATED CALENDAR CASE, SUBMITTED TO THIS COURT ON THE RECORD AND THE BRIEFS OF THE PARTIES. APPELLANT, MARLIN E. HOSTETTLER, APPEALS THE JUDGMENT ENTERED BY THE ASHTABULA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. THE TRIAL COURT ENTERED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF APPELLEE, COMMUNITY CARE AMBULANCE ("COMMUNITY CARE").
{¶ 2} HOSTETTLER WAS IN THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOR UNRELATED KNEE SURGERY. FOLLOWING THE SURGERY, HE NEEDED TO GO TO THE WADSWORTH-RITTMAN HOSPITAL FOR REHABILITATION. COMMUNITY CARE WAS CHOSEN TO TRANSPORT HIM TO THE WADSWORTH HOSPITAL. THE RECORD IS UNCLEAR AS TO WHO MADE THE DECISION THAT COMMUNITY CARE WOULD TRANSPORT HOSTETTLER.
{¶ 3} HOSTETTLER WAS STRAPPED TO A GURNEY IN THE BACK OF THE AMBULANCE. THE AMBULANCE ATTENDANTS, CHRIS HARRIS AND TANYA TAYLOR, STATED THAT THE GURNEY WAS PROPERLY SECURED. HOWEVER, HOSTETTLER STATED THAT THE GURNEY WAS MOVING DURING PORTIONS OF THE TRIP.
{¶ 4} THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION REGARDING THE DIRECTIONS TO THE WADSWORTH HOSPITAL. THE AMBULANCE DRIVER EXITED ROUTE 77 ON TO ROUTE 21 NEAR CLEVELAND, RATHER THAN TAKING THE EXIT FOR ROUTE 21 CLOSER TO AKRON. IT WAS DURING THIS SIDETRACK THAT HOSTETTLER CLAIMS HE WAS INJURED. HE STATED THIS PORTION OF THE RIDE WAS VERY BUMPY AND HE WAS THROWN AROUND THE BACK OF THE AMBULANCE. HE REACHED HIS RIGHT ARM OUT AND HELD SOME CABINETS FOR SUPPORT. HIS RIGHT ARM THEN BOUNCED AGAINST THE SIDE OF THE GURNEY, CAUSING AN INJURY TO HIS ULNAR NERVE.
{¶ 5} IN 2002, HOSTETTLER FILED AN ACTION AGAINST COMMUNITY CARE, WHICH WAS ASSIGNED CASE NO. 02 CV 583. THIS ACTION WAS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
{¶ 6} HOSTETTLER REFILED SUIT AGAINST COMMUNITY CARE, RESULTING IN THE INSTANT ACTION. THE TRIAL COURT ORDERED ALL DISCOVERY MATERIALS FROM CASE NO. 02 CV 583 TRANSFERRED TO THIS CASE. THE RECORD BEFORE THIS COURT DOES NOT CONTAIN THE DISCOVERY REQUESTS. IT DOES CONTAIN THE TRANSCRIBED DEPOSITIONS OF HOSTETTLER, TANYA TAYLOR, AND CHRIS HARRIS. IN ADDITION, IT CONTAINS THE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DR. EARL BROWN, WHO TREATED HOSTETTLER FOR HIS INJURY. THIS VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION WAS FILED AFTER COMMUNITY CARE FILED ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD DEMONSTRATING COMMUNITY CARE OR THE TRIAL COURT OBJECTED TO THE FORM OF THIS RECORDING PURSUANT TO CIV.R. 30(B)(3). THEREFORE, WE WILL CONSIDER THIS DEPOSITION, AS THERE IS NOTHING IN THE RECORD TO INDICATE IT IS NOT PROPERLY PART OF THE RECORD BEFORE US.
{¶ 7} HOSTETTLER RAISES ONE ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR:
{¶ 8} "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANTS [SIC] BY GRANTING THE DEFENDANT/APPELLEE'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT."
{¶ 9} PURSUANT TO CIV.R. 56(C), SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS APPROPRIATE WHEN THERE IS NO GENUINE ISSUE OF MATERIAL FACT AND THE MOVING PARTY IS ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW.1 IN ADDITION, IT MUST APPEAR FROM THE EVIDENCE AND STIPULATIONS THAT REASONABLE MINDS CAN COME TO ONLY ONE CONCLUSION, WHICH IS ADVERSE TO THE NON-MOVING PARTY.2 THE STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR THE GRANTING OF A MOTION