Treweek

Introduction

“An object is what it is.” So stated the Court of Appeal in Farnham v. City of Los Angeles (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 1097 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 720 ], waiving aside concerns that its broad definition of “trail” under Government Code section 831.4, would result in expansion of the term beyond recognition, providing a governmental entity “the incentive to call anything it wishes a ‘trail’ in order to qualify for section 831.4 immunity.” ( 68 Cal.App.4th at p. 1103 .) Here, we are confronted with the question whether a public boat dock ramp is unquestionably a “trail,” immunizing a city from liability for the ramp’s failure. We conclude that the ramp itself is not a “trail” under section 831.4 and that therefore the trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings on that ground.

Facts and Procedural Background

Marguerite Treweek (appellant) filed a complaint against the City of Napa (City), alleging she was injured as she walked from the Napa City Dock located near the intersection of Third and Main Streets, across a boat ramp, when the ramp failed and gave way, causing her to fall. She alleged City neglected its duty to maintain the dock and the ramp in a…