PENNSYLVANIA DOT GOES BACK TO TRIAL OVER LACK OF GUARD RAIL

A Commonwealth Court in Pennsylvania reversed a lower court ruling which found the State DOT not liable for the injuries sustained by a couple who swerved their car to avoid hitting a deer and rolled over an embankment which did not have a guard rail nor any signs warning that no guard rail was installed. The couple charged that the DOT was negligent in failing to provide a sufficient berm or shoulder area and guard rail and/or warning sign stating the lack of a guard rail. According to the higher Court, although the DOT was immune from charges for injuries caused by wild animals, it was not immune from other circumstances involved in this case. Among these were obligations of the state and the township to repair and maintain this particular road, control of the guard rail, drainage system and berm. This left the DOT's liability on these issues open for future litigation by the couople. Monzo v. Com. Dept. of Transp. 556 A.2d 493 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1989)

  • Availability:
  • Corporate Authors:

    TranSafety, Incorporated

    5811 Oak Leather Drive
    Burke, VA  United States  22015
  • Publication Date: 1990-7

Media Info

  • Pagination: p. 1-2
  • Serial:
    • TRANSAFETY REPORTER
    • Volume: 8
    • Issue Number: 7
    • Publisher: TranSafety, Incorporated
    • ISSN: 0884-612X

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00496937
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS
  • Created Date: Aug 31 1990 12:00AM