In Lane v. City of Sacramento, ordered published April 16, 2010, the Third Appellate District reversed a summary judgment granted to the city in a dangerous condition of public property case. The plaintiff driver, driving in the #1 westbound lane of a four-lane street, was distracted and swerved to the left. His wheels hit the concrete divider between eastbound and westbound traffic lanes, injuring him and the plaintiff passenger. The court granted the city summary judgment on the ground that a search of a city tort claim database showed no previous accidents involving the divider.
The court of appeal reversed. It held the city failed to establish that plaintiff could not prove the divider was a dangerous condition. The city failed to identify the nature of the claim database and how it was searched; and in any event, absence of tort claims did not establish absence of accidents. The court rejected the city’s alternate ground that the plaintiff was not using the property with due care, on the ground that the plaintiff need not prove he was using the property with due care -- only that the property posed a danger to those who use it with due care. Finally, the court rejected the argument that the divider did not cause the accident, since it did not cause the plaintiff to swerve. The collision with the divider caused the driver’s and passenger’s injuries