Summary Judgment Proper Where Entity Establishes Prima Facie Case That Intersection Is Not Dangerous and Plaintiff's Contrary Expert Evidence Is Properly Excluded

In Salas v. CalTrans, ordered published August 29, 2011, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court ruling granting CalTrans summary judgment in an auto vs. pedestrian case.  The accident arose when a motorist hit a pedestrian who was walking back and forth outside the crosswalk on a state highway.  The plaintiff alleged that the roadway was in a dangerous condition due to insufficient markings and the high speeds of motorists.  CalTrans established a prima facie case for summary judgment by presenting evidence that the accident took place during the daytime on a clear day; that the roadway was straight and visibility was not obstructed; that there was only one other auto vs. pedestrian accident at the intersection in the preceding 10 years; and that a roadway expert opined that the intersection was safe.  The burden shifted to the plaintiff to raise a triable issue of fact.  The trial court sustained CalTrans's objections to nearly all of the plaintiff's expert evidence; and the plaintiff failed to adequately address those rulings on appeal.  The remaining evidence -- that auto vs. auto accidents had taken place in the vicinity of the intersection -- failed to raise a triable issue of fact.