Claims Against City or County for Dangerous Intersections, Dangerous Streets

About twice per week I am asked about a potential claim against a city, county or other public entity for some unsafe condition. People often ask me about dangerous roadways, intersections and freeways in Oakland. The questions may be prompted by dangerous on-ramps, insufficient lighting, broken traffic controls, or dangerous and inadequately marked crosswalks. Each of these requires a fairly complex analysis, and each case depends on its own specific facts.

In general, the issue of whether a public entity is liable for a dangerous condition is governed by California Government Code section 835. Under that statute, there is a four-part test. The four factors to be considered are:

1. Whether the dangerous condition was on "public property"
2. Whether the property was "dangerous" at the time of the injury
3. Whether the injury was caused by the "dangerous" condition
4. Whether the public entity had known about it for a sufficient period of time, so as to allow it to repair the dangerous condition.

Public Property
Some of the questions that may be relevant are:
Does the city or county own the property?
Does it control the property?
Did it rent the property out? If so, how involved is the city or county in running the property?

Dangerous Condition
The design or layout of property may make it "dangerous."
Generally, the failure to install safety lights does not make a public entity liable.
However, the failure to maintain may make it liable.

Causation
A plaintiff must be able to show that the dangerous condition actually caused the accident or injury, and that the injury was reasonably foreseeable.

Notice
Finally, a plaintiff must be able to show that the entity had sufficient time to become aware of the dangerous condition and fix it.

This is not intended to constitute legal advice, but only a general overview of public entity liability.