Baker v. Wayne Cty., 2014 Ohio 3529

Kelli Baker died in a single-car crash on County Road 44 during a day-to-day maintenance project by the Wayne County Engineer.
The road had been scratch paved the day before, raising the asphalt level and covering existing center and edge lines.
Edge lines were not repainted, leaving no visible edge lines at the time of the accident.
The berms had not been banked to mitigate edge drop-off; the road was under ongoing repair.
Baker parents sued Wayne County alleging negligent failure to keep the road in repair, seeking to defeat immunity under R.C. 2744.02(B)(3).
The trial court granted summary judgment for the County; the court of appeals reverses and remands for further proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the road was “in repair” under R.C. 2744.02(B)(3) during ongoing maintenance.	Baker argues ongoing roadwork meant the road was not in repair and the County liable.	Wayne County contends immunity applies because the project was not yet complete and edge conditions are outside the public road.	Yes; the road was “in repair” under ongoing work, defeating immunity on this basis.

Lucchesi v. Fischer, 179 Ohio App.3d 317 (12th Dist. 2008) (edge drop not part of public roads; edge lines define public road boundary under 2744.02(B)(3))
Bonace v. Springfield Twp., 179 Ohio App.3d 736 (7th Dist. 2008) (edges/berms not part of public road; immunity narrowed by edge-line framework)
Ivory v. Austintown Twp., 2011-Ohio-3171 (7th Dist. 2011) (neither a catch basin nor related pipe is a public road; not part of the traveled portion)
Shope v. Portsmouth, 2012-Ohio-1605 (4th Dist. 2012) (public road definition cannot apply to unimproved unimproved grassy area at end of street)
Sanderbeck v. Medina, 9th Dist. Medina No. 09CA0051-M, 2010-Ohio-3659 (2010) (application of ‘in repair’ to maintenance-related conditions)
Huffman v. Bd. of Cty. Commrs., 2006-Ohio-3479 (7th Dist. 2006) (illustrative of failing to keep road in repair concepts)