Court Opinion

ID: 9945228
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-27 16:12:04.116473+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:25.404016
License: Public Domain

[Cite as In re Childress, 2024-Ohio-708.]

                               IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF OHIO

 IN RE: CHANDLER M. CHILDRESS                     Case No. 2023-00631VI

 KIMBERELY ANN CHILDRESS                          Judge Lisa L. Sadler
 JOHN CHILDRESS, III
                                                  ORDER
         Applicants

        {¶1}     On December 15, 2023, a hearing was held in this matter before a
Magistrate of this court. On January 9, 2024, the Magistrate issued a Decision wherein
she found that applicants Kimberely and John Childress failed to file their application
within three years of the death of the decedent and that no exception to the statute of
limitations found in R.C. 2743.60(A)(2)(a) applied to their claim.             Accordingly, the
Magistrate concluded that the Final Decision of the Attorney General (“AG”) as it pertains
to Kimberely and John was reasonable and lawful and recommended that it be
AFFIRMED, in part. However, the Magistrate further found that the decedent’s daughter,
claimant A.N.C., was a minor, and thus, her claim was timely filed pursuant to R.C.
2743.60(A)(2)(b) and applicable case law. Therefore, the Magistrate concluded that the
Final Decision of the AG as it pertains to A.N.C.’s claim was not reasonable or lawful and
recommended that it be REVERSED, in part. The magistrate recommended that the
claim be remanded to the AG for further investigation and a new Finding of Fact and
Decision regarding the dependency claim of A.N.C. and any possible dependent’s
economic loss and dependent’s replacement services loss incurred as a result of the
decedent’s death.
        {¶2}     Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(i) states, in part: “A party may file written objections to a
magistrate’s decision within fourteen days of the filing of the decision, whether or not the
court has adopted the decision during that fourteen-day period as permitted by Civ.R.
53(D)(4)(e)(i).” No objections were filed.
Case No. 2023-00631VI                            -2-                                     ORDER

         {¶3}      Upon review of the claim file, and the Magistrate’s Decision, it is the Court’s
finding that the Magistrate was correct in her analysis of the issues and application of the
law. Accordingly, this Court adopts the Magistrate’s Decision and recommendation as its
own.
         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT
         {¶4}      The January 9, 2024 Decision of the Magistrate is ADOPTED;
         {¶5}      This claim is REMANDED for further investigation of A.N.C.’s claim;
         {¶6}      Pursuant to R.C. 2743.61(B) and the magistrate’s recommendation,
judgment is entered for applicants;
         {¶7}      Costs assumed by the reparations fund.

                                                LISA L. SADLER
                                                Judge

Filed 2/6/24
Sent to S.C. Reporter 2/27/24