Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Sutton v. Golden Gate Bridge

12/3/1998

e manager, "in addition to the lack of a median barrier, lane changing and the changing and timing of lane configurations including the lack of buffer lanes at mid-day were all encompassed within the Deck Replacement Project plans approved by the Board."


In addition, as the District points out, it is entitled to immunity for its decision to prohibit lane changing and any failure to enforce the speed limit. "A public entity is not liable for an injury caused by adopting or failing to adopt an enactment or by failing to enforce any law." (§ 818.2, see Osgood v. County of Shasta (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 586, 590 [county was immune from liability for failing to enact or enforce safety regulations regarding water skiing on lake]; see, also § 830.4 ["A condition is not a dangerous condition . . . merely because of the failure to provide regulatory traffic control signals, stop signs, yield right-of-way signs, or speed restriction signs . . . ."].) Further, appellant failed to show that an exception to public entity immunity as set forth in section 830.8 for failing to provide warning signals or signs warning signs was applicable. Finally, the record also fails to support appellant's argument that warning signs were necessary. The alleged dangers were reasonably apparent and would have been anticipated by a person exercising due care. (See § 830.8; see, also Allyson v. Department of Transportation (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 1304, 1318 [section 831 weather immunity applied where plaintiff failed to offer evidence to rebut showing that snow was reasonably apparent on highway].)


DISPOSITION


The judgment is affirmed. The District shall recover its costs on appeal.


We concur: Reardon, J. McGuiness, J.


Filed 12/29/98


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR


DAVID P. SUTTON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent.


A078565


(Marin County Super. Ct. No. 165443)


ORDER GRANTING PUBLICATION


BY THE COURT


The requests to publish this court's opinion filed December 3, 1998, is granted and the opinion shall be certified for publication in the Official Reports.


Trial Court: Superior Court Marin County


Trial Judge: Honorable Lynn O. Taylor






Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

California Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE