Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes

Summary

The California Supreme Court held that design immunity does not categorically bar a dangerous-condition claim alleging that a public entity failed to warn about a danger created by an approved roadway design. Such a failure-to-warn claim may proceed under the statutory provision governing failure to protect against a known dangerous condition, subject to proof of notice, a concealed trap, and causation. The court declined to overrule its longstanding precedent and affirmed the Court of Appeal's judgment remanding for further proceedings on the warning claim.