De La Rosa v. City of San Bernardino

Good Law
16 Cal. App. 3d 739·1971 Cal. App. LEXIS 1633·94 Cal. Rptr. 175
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 16, 1971Civ. 10039California3,318 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tamura, J.

This is a personal injury action against the City of San Bernardino (City) for injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiffs in a two-car intersection collision. Plaintiffs sued the City on the theory that the .accident was proximately caused by a hazardous condition existing at the intersection. After both sides rested the court granted a defense motion for a directed verdict. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment entered on the directed verdict.

On this appeal defendant’s principal argument in support of the directed verdict is that plaintiffs’ proof failed, as a matter of law, to establish the existence of a dangerous condition. In addition, defendant argues (a) that under the evidence it was entitled to the benefit of the “design or plan” immunity of section 830.6 of the Government Code and (b) that by virtue of section 835.4, subdivision (b), of the Government Code, the county was absolved of liability because the City had taken action to protect the public against risk of injury created by a dangerous condition, if it existed, and that the precautionaiy measure so taken was reasonable.

A directed verdict is proper only when, disregarding conflicting evidence and giving…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.