In the Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery Count

In the Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County, Ohio 41 N. Perry Street, Dayton, OH 45422 Garica Hunter 425 Alberta Street Dayton, Ohio 45410 and Zhariyah Wheeler, by and through Garica Hunter as parent and next best friend, Case No.: 2025 CV 04525 425 Alberta Street Dayton, Ohio 45410 Judge: Angelina N. Jakson Plaintiffs, vs. David L. Martin, II 105 E. Hudson Avenue Dayton, Ohio 45405-3506 and Progressive Specialty Insurance Company Box 89490 Cleveland, Ohio 44101-6490 and Ohio Department of Medicaid Collections Enforcement Section 30 E. Broad Street, 14th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215 and XYZ Corporations, 1-10, Name Unknown Address Unknown and John Does, 1-10 Name Unknown Address Unknown Defendants. Complaint First Claim 1. Garica Hunter states that on or about September 2nd, 2023, she was operating a motor vehicle at or near the intersection of E. Monument Avenue and N. Patterson Blvd., Montgomery County, Ohio when the vehicle being operated by being operated by Garica Hunter was struck from behind by the vehicle being operated by Defendant David Martin [the "collision"]. 2. Also occupying the vehicle being operated by Garica Hunter at the time of the collision was Plaintiff's daughter Zhariyah Wheeler [DOB: 08/16/2010] . 3. At all times, Plaintiff Garica Hunter was the guardian and next best friend of her minor child, Zhariyah Wheeler . 4. The collision was a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant Martin. 5. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant Martin, Plaintiff Garica Hunter was caused to suffer both economic and non-economic injuries some of which may be permanent. 6. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant Martin, Plaintiff Zhariyah Wheeler was caused to suffer both economic and non-economic injuries, including paralysis and loss of her ability to speak, some of which may be permanent. 7. As a direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiffs have each been injured in an amount exceeding $25,000.00 but which cannot be stated with specificity. Second Claim 8. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations of the First Claim. 9. Plaintiffs bring this action against Defendants John Does 1-10 and XYZ Corporations 1-10 whose names and addresses are currently unknown to Plaintiffs but who may be responsible for Plaintiffs' injuries as alleged herein. Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint once such John Does and XYZ Corporations are identified. 10. Defendants John Does 1-10 and XYZ Corporations 1-10 identities are currently unknown and cannot, presently, be reasonably ascertained with due diligence. Ohio Civ. R. 15 is expressly referenced and, by such reference, incorporated herein. 11. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, Plaintiffs were caused to suffer those injuries described in the above ¶'s. 12. As a direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiffs have each been injured in an amount exceeding $25,000.00 but which cannot be stated with specificity. Third Claim 13. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations of the above Claims. 14. Ohio Department of Medicaid ["ODM"] is a State of Ohio entity which provides health care coverage to certain residents in the State of Ohio. 15. ODM is joined pursuant to O.R.C.P. 19 because ODM claims to have, or may claim to have, an automatic right of recovery arising from the collision per RC 5160.37. 16. ODM may have provided health care coverage to each Plaintiff at the time of collision and/or during the time period when each Plaintiff treated for injuries arising from the collision. 17. ODM paid, or may have paid, some of each Plaintiff's collision-related medical bills. 18. Plaintiffs demand that ODM protect its own interests and incur its own attorney's fees and expenses in relation to protection of any asserted subrogation interests. 19. Plaintiffs demand that ODM provide an itemization of any asserted subrogation interest. 20. Plaintiffs further advise that if ODM does not defend itself then ODM may be subject to a motion requesting that a declaratory judgment be issued that ODM be deemed to have waived and/or forfeited any rights it may have had for subrogation and/or reimbursement for monies issued to pay any of each Plaintiff's medical bills arising from the collision. Fourth Claim 21. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations of the above Claims. 22. At all times, Plaintiffs were insureds, or considered insureds, as defined by the applicable policy issued by Defendant Progressive Specialty Insurance Company ["Progressive"] which covered the collision. The applicable policy number is believed to be: 959781661. 23. Defendant Progressive is an insurance company licensed by the Ohio Department of Insurance to conduct business in the State of Ohio which such business includes the sale of motor vehicle insurance policies. 24. Defendant Progressive is joined herein because some or all Defendants may be declared to be uninsured or may be determined to be underinsured. Therefore, Defendant Progressive is a necessary party to the within litigation. 25. Defendant Progressive is joined herein because the insurance policy limits of other Defendants are presently unknown and, therefore, Plaintiffs may present uninsured or underinsured claims. See Sarmiento v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co. 106 Ohio St. 3d 403. Therefore, Defendant Progressive is a necessary party to the within litigation. 26. Defendant Progressive is joined herein because it has made, or may make, payments under Plaintiffs' insurance policy for which such payments it asserts a right of reimbursement or right of subrogation. Therefore, Defendant Progressive is a necessary party to the within litigation. 27. Defendant Progressive is subject to the mandates of ORC 2323.44 "Rights of subrogee." 28. Plaintiffs demand all rights accorded to them under the subject Progressive policy of insurance should an uninsured or underinsured claim be presented. Fifth Claim 29. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate the allegations of the above Claims. 30. The actions of Defendant Martin merit the imposition of punitive damages. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the above, Plaintiffs have each been injured in an amount exceeding $25,000.00 but which cannot be stated with specificity. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment, declaratory or otherwise, against the Defendants for compensatory damages, punitive damages, waiver of asserted lien[s], costs, expenses and attorney's fees incurred herein. /s/ David A. Bressman David A. Bressman (0047128) Jedidiah I. Bressman (0096637) Law Office of David A. Bressman 2727 Tuller Parkway, Ste. 100 Dublin, Ohio 43017 (614)538-1116 Fax: (614)761-8399 David@Bressmanlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs 12-8, 12-15, 12-22, 12-29/2025, 1-5, 1-12/2026