Sampson v. Norfolk Southern Corporation, Unpublished Decision (9-29-1999)
Sampson v. Norfolk Southern Corporation, Unpublished Decision (9-29-1999)
Opinion of the Court
This appeal, considered on the accelerated calendar under App.R. 11.1(E) and Loc.R. 12, is not controlling authority except as provided in S.Ct.R.Rep.Op. 2(G)(1).
The first assignment of error, which alleges that the trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment of defendants-appellees Norfolk Southern Corporation and Norfolk and Western Railway Company, is overruled. Kevin Sampson was an undiscovered trespasser, and, therefore, the railroad owed him no duty other than to refrain from injuring him by willful or wanton misconduct. See McKinney v. Hartz Restle Realtors, Inc. (1987),
The second assignment of error is overruled because Ohio has repeatedly and expressly rejected the attractive-nuisance doctrine. See McKinney v. Hartz Restle Realtors, Inc.,supra; Elliott v. Nagy (1986),
Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Further, a certified copy of this Judgment Entry shall constitute the mandate, which shall be sent to the trial court under App.R. 27. Costs shall be taxed under App.R. 24.
Doan, P.J., Hildebrandt and Gorman, JJ. To the Clerk:
per order of the Court _______________________________.
________________________________________________________ Presiding Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.