GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT
The paper notes that it is imperative that certain information be known by engineers responsible for highway operations. These include: traffic speeds; traffic volume; accident patterns by intersection and homogeneous road sections; and existing deficiencies. The development of a deficiency or sufficiency study and a plan for eventual elimination of the deficiencies is equally important. To be successful in a court of law, the government attorney must be able to convince the jury that the engineering function is both competent and concerned with the safety of the road user. The case is described of Harlan v. State of California, in which the state awarded damages to several young girls burned when a vehicle struck a guardrail on the curved portion of a bridge. The limitations of design immunity, are discussed, as well as design standards, warrants, guides and policies. Selected case examples are briefly reviewed.
- Presented at the 30th Annual Western District 6 Meeting of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Santa Clara, California, July 13, 1977.
Schultz (TG)San Jose State University
San Jose, CA USA
- Publication Date: 0
- Features: References;
- Pagination: 11 p.
- TRT Terms: Automobiles; Courts; Crashes; Freeway operations; Governments; Guardrails; Highway design; Highway engineers; Immunity (Law); Intersections; Laws; Loss and damage; Traffic speed; Traffic volume; Warrants (Traffic control devices)
- Uncontrolled Terms: Responsibilities
- Subject Areas: Highways; Law; Safety and Human Factors;
- Accession Number: 00188485
- Record Type: Publication
- Report/Paper Numbers: Conf Paper
- Files: TRIS
- Created Date: Apr 12 1979 12:00AM