CAY V. STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT
631 So.2d 393 (1994)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Department (D) appealed an affirmation of a judgment in favor of Cay
(Ps) in Ps' wrongful death action arising from their son's death in a fall from a bridge
constructed and maintained by D.
FACTS: Cay, a twenty-seven-year-old offshore worker entered a barroom and stayed for an
hour. He carried an opened beer with him. Five days later, Cay's body was discovered on a
rock bank of the Little River, thirty-five feet below the bridge across the river. Cay would
have had to cross the bridge in order to travel from Jonesville to his home. Evidence
indicated he fell from the bridge There was no evidence suggesting suicide or foul play.
There was evidence that Cay was wearing dark clothes, was walking on the wrong side of the
road for pedestrian traffic, and was intoxicated. The bridge, built in 1978. The side
railings were thirty-two inches high, the minimum height under existing standards for
bridges designed for vehicular traffic. There were no curbs, sidewalks or separate railings
for pedestrian traffic, although it was well known that many pedestrians had used the old
bridge to cross the river to communities and recreation areas on the other side. Ps filed
this action against D, seeking recovery on the basis that the guard railings on the sides of
the bridge were too low and therefore unsafe for pedestrians whom D knew were using the
bridge and that D failed to provide pedestrian walkways or signs warning pedestrians about
the hazardous conditions. The trial court rendered judgment for Ps holding that the fall was
caused in part by the inadequate railing and in part by Cay's intoxicated condition. The
court found that D breached its duty to pedestrians by failing to build the side railings to
a height of thirty-six inches, as required by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards for pedestrian railings. There was no direct
evidence of why D fell. The court apportioned fault sixty percent to D and forty percent to
Cay. The court of appeal affirmed. The court further stated, 'Had the railing been higher,
the decedent might have been able to avoid the accident.' D appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment