In Loeb v. County of San Diego, ordered published December 16, 2019, the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 1 affirmed nonsuit for the defendant County in a dangerous condition case. The plaintiff was injured when she tripped on an uneven concrete pathway in a county park. The pathway led to a restroom. The plaintiff was using the path to travel from a barbecue in the park to the restroom. The county moved for summary judgment on the ground that the path was a recreational trail under Government Code section 831.4. The trial court found a triable issue of fact on whether the path was designed and used for a recreational purpose, or simply to provide access to the restroom. The county renewed its motion for summary judgment, adding evidence of photos of people using the path to ride bikes, walk dogs, and run. The plaintiff disputed whether the photos depicted people using the path for recreational purposes or simply heading to the restrooms. The trial court again found a triable issue of fact. At trial, when the parties debated the special verdict forms to be used, the plaintiff stipulated the path was used for recreational purposes. She maintained that the issue was whether it was designed for a recreational purpose. The trial court granted the county nonsuit, on the ground that the use established the trail immunity.
The appellate court agreed. Under the statutory language, trail immunity applies if a trail is used for recreational purposes, or to provide access to recreational purposes. The purpose for which the trail is designed is not the determinative factor. Because the paved path in a park was a trail, and the plaintiff stipulated at trial (as she did not do at the summary judgment level) that the trail was used for recreational purposes, the county was entitled to nonsuit.
Comments