This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
Auto v. Bicycle
Dangerous Condition of Public Property

Leslie Schoenfeld, individually and as successor-in-interest to Samuel D. Ragent v. Nathan L. Gans Jr., City of Walnut Creek

Published: Jan. 31, 2009 | Result Date: Sep. 3, 2008 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: CIVMSC04-00937 Verdict –  Defense

Court

Contra Costa Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jim Larsen


Defendant

Peter P. Edrington

James L. Hazard


Experts

Plaintiff

Richard F. Ryan
(technical)

Defendant

Kenneth C. Berner
(technical)

Facts

On Jan. 25, 2004, Nathan Gans drove his vehicle into decedent Samuel Ragent, a 50-year-old attorney, as Ragent was riding his bicycle southbound along South Main Street at the intersection of Castle Hill Road in Walnut Creek. Plaintiff Leslie Schoenfeld, Ragent's widow, sued Gans for motor vehicle negligence. The parties settled for $50,000 (policy limit).

The plaintiff sued defendant city of Walnut Creek for maintaining a dangerous condition of public property. The trial court dismissed the suit, citing defendant's immunity, but the appellate court reversed. The case was bifurcated for trial of liability issues on remand.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended the 1994 redesign of the intersection created a dangerous condition. The addition of a left turn lane for northbound traffic narrowed the distance between the right lane of travel and an adjacent storm drain, forcing bicyclists to swerve to the left and expose themselves to traffic.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended it was immune to liability because city engineers had approved the redesign before construction. However, because defendant could not produce written approvals or documentation of the contention, the defense was not absolute. Rather, defendant contended it never undertook construction of street improvements unless the city engineer approved them individually.

Damages

The plaintiff sought unspecified damages.

Injuries

Death, loss of comfort and society.

Result

The jury returned a defense verdict, finding it was more probable than not that city engineer approved the redesign and authorized the subsequent construction of the intersection.

Deliberation

3.5 hours

Poll

12-0

Length

five days


#115179

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390