Sometimes courts disagree on how to read and interpret the law. CaseyGerry attorney, Eric Ganci explores the decision in Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes (2023) 14 Cal.5th 639, where the Supreme court steps in to settle a disagreement between two lower courts on whether a design immunity claim against a public government agency can preclude a decision for seeking a claim when a government has failed to warn of a dangerous situation. This raises the question:

Does design immunity bar all claims that seek to impose liability for injuries resulting from a dangerous feature of a roadway?

Listen to learn more:

Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes (2023) 14 Cal.5th 639

Cameron v. State of California (1972) 7 Cal.3d 318

Weinstein v. Department of Transportation (2006) 139 Cal. App. 4th 52

California Government Code section 830.6

California Government Code section 835

Bebe v. Wonderful Pistachios & Almonds LLC, cited as of 6/14/23 as 2023 WL 3837260

Miranda v. Bomel Construction Co., Inc. (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 1326

Sarti v. Salt Creek (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1187

CACI 400

CACI 430

Paige v. Safeway, Inc. (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 1108

California Evidence Code section 721(b)

Learn more about Eric Ganci