TwinTurboTerror

I'm prepared to sue the VA Dept. of Transportation (hereinafter VDOT) for a pothole I hit last month, which flattened my tire and busted my CV joint but thankfully did not damage my rim.

Here's the deal: VDOT has named 2 private companies as having done work that caused the pothole. The lawyer of one co. has denied it, and I suspect the other will too.

I'm filing a General Dist. Court claim against VDOT (I can't go through small claims because the VA Tort Claims Act waiving sovereign immunity forecloses that venue). Should I name the 2 companies as co-defendants? I figure if nobody will accept responsibility, I can have the judge sort it out for them.

OTOH, ultimately I believe VDOT is responsible on theories of negligence and failure to warn, since they are ultimately responsible for the road. The analogy is to a slip and fall in a supermarket: While the supermarket can ask the party who knocked over a jar for indemnification, if I slip and fall on the mess and the supermarket had constructive knowledge, they should compensate me. I should not have to go after the guy who caused the mess.

The upside of suing VDOT is that my local court has personal jurisdiction over them (since VDOT is a state-wide agency). If I sue the other 2 co.s, I have to file in Arlington County court, which is 120 mis. away from me.

TIA for any input. I know this is probably not worth the economic effort, but I feel that I need to do it on principle so that VDOT will be forced to do its job.

Armchair Pistolero

Disclaimer: I'm a CA atty and don't know **** about VA law.

It sounds like you are right about liability and you need not add the contractors as defendants, but note that VDOT may have the option suing the contractors (impleading?) to add them to your suit.

Are you sure your court won't have jsdxn over the two contractors? My experience in CA is that if you sue a defendant in the wrong court (e.g., because the defendant does not reside there), it is still incumbent on the defendant to file a motion to quash or change venue. The defendant can (and frequently does) voluntarily consent to jsdxn if they respond to the complaint without raising jsdxn. Filing a motion to quash or change venue isn't often worth it, especially if your case is asking for a few grand only.

Are you sure you can sue VDOT anywhere in state? In CA, a state agency can be sued in the Capitol, where ever its headquarters is located, and where it maintains offices, and a couple of other exceptions, and that if sued in the wrong district/county the state agency can remove to the venue of its choosing.

And of course you are probably over-thinking this. The chances that this goes much past the filing of your complaint are slim. These guys would be dumb to litigate a case like this rather than offer you a nice little settlement.

Good luck and have fun.

TwinTurboTerror

here. VA law is like CA law (and any other jurisdiction's) in that respect.

You offer an interesting suggestion on forcing the defendants to file for a change of venue. I may just do that for the heck of it and for my own convenience and to cause them the hassle.

You're right; I hope to get some kind of settlement out of this. I've been doing "letterhead litigation" for the past month, but the maze of potential parties and blame-shifting just keeps getting larger.