Conservator of motorcycle passenger brought action against the city and county for negligence and premise liability, alleging that the street’s deteriorated condition contributed the automobile accident in which passenger suffered permanent brain injuries.
The District Court found that the city and county were immune from suit under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA) and dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed. City and county petitioned for certiorari, which was granted.
The Supreme Court of Colorado held that:
- Deteriorated condition of the road did not constitute a dangerous condition, and
- Deterioration of the road did not physically interfere with the movement of traffic.
Deteriorated condition of road on which an automobile accident occurred did not constitute a dangerous condition as an unreasonable risk to the health or safety of the public, as required for city and county to waive governmental immunity under Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA) based on the dangerous condition of a road, where a city pavement engineer examined road eight days before crash and determined it was “well worn” and in “very poor condition” but did not find any deep, wide potholes that could catch a tire or ruts that would redirect a car that would warrant immediate repair, and road did not contain features which would force a driver to make an emergency maneuver, or any other road characteristics such as a raised pavement lip that could damage a vehicle and lead to an accident.
Deterioration of road did not physically interfere with movement of traffic causing motorcycle and a third-party driver to crash, as required for city and county to waive governmental immunity under Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (CGIA) for a dangerous condition of a road, where a third-party driver impeded motorcycle and its passenger by cutting them off, the road itself did not cause motorcycle to act erratically, no safety device malfunctioned on road, and road’s surface, prior to the third-party’s actions, did not prevent motorcycle driver from performing as expected.