Driving in and around San Diego, you shouldn’t have to worry that the road itself is unsafe. But dangerous roadway conditions—defective design, missing guardrails, poor sight lines, obscured signage, unsafe construction zones, or unprotected crosswalks—can turn an ordinary drive into a life-changing crash. Hulburt Law Firm represents drivers, passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians who were seriously injured or lost a loved one because a roadway, intersection, or crosswalk was not reasonably safe.
Types of dangerous roadway cases we handle:
Throughout your dangerous roadway case, we keep you informed, answer your questions, and explain each step in clear terms. Because we limit the number of catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases we accept, we’re able to dig deeply into road-design and maintenance issues—reviewing police reports, collision histories, public-records responses, design plans, as-built drawings, maintenance and trimming logs, traffic studies, and sight-line or visibility analyses.
These cases often involve claims against cities, counties, or state agencies such as Caltrans, and they raise complex issues like dangerous condition of public property, design immunity, and strict government-claim deadlines. We work with traffic engineers, human-factors experts, and accident reconstructionists to show how the roadway contributed to the crash and how reasonable changes—or warnings—could have prevented it.
If you or a loved one has been injured because of a dangerous roadway in or around San Diego County, we invite you to contact us for a free case review.
Our attorneys have a proven track record of achieving extraordinary results.
Jury verdict against Caltrans for a 13-year-old boy who was hit by a car while using a dangerous crosswalk.
A sudden tire failure caused an SUV to fishtail and crash into a tree on the side of a San Diego County highway, killing a beloved husband and father.
A massive, improperly installed gate collapsed on a sub-contracted worker who was asked by the general contractor to paint it, causing his tragic death.
A concrete block wall wasn't properly supported and fell on a construction worker in El Cajon, killing him.
An event producer’s negligence led to a participant’s death in a vehicle collision.
A defective airplane engine ignition component caused a deadly crash in San Diego.
A high-speed, multi-lane crosswalk on a busy highway was left uncontrolled—no traffic lights, no stop signs—despite being part of a school route for children walking to a nearby middle school. One afternoon, while using that crosswalk, a 13-year-old boy was struck by a car and catastrophically injured.
Caltrans claimed the crosswalk was safe because there were no prior reported collisions. It blamed the driver for the crash and argued that various government immunities shielded it from responsibility.
Attorney Conor Hulburt obtained an internal Caltrans policy document directing the agency to upgrade high-speed crosswalks that met the same criteria as the crosswalk where this boy was hit. Despite its own written policy, Caltrans had never made the required safety improvements.
At trial, Conor presented evidence and expert testimony showing that the crosswalk was unreasonably dangerous, that Caltrans knew it was dangerous, and that simple safety measures—such as better signals, markings, or traffic controls—could have prevented the accident.
The jury returned a $28.1 million verdict in favor of the boy and against Caltrans. Beyond compensating him for his lifelong needs, the verdict sent a clear message about the importance of following safety policies and protecting children on their way to and from school. Conor hopes this result will help motivate Caltrans to make similar crossings safer throughout California.
If you believe a dangerous roadway or crosswalk played a role in a serious crash involving you or a loved one, you don’t have to sort it out alone. Request a free dangerous roadway case review to talk with a San Diego attorney about what happened and your options.
During your free case review, we talk through where the crash happened, how it occurred, and what injuries you’re dealing with. We’ll ask questions about the roadway, intersection, or crosswalk itself—visibility, signage, lighting, lane layout, prior near-misses—and review any information you already have, such as police reports, photos, medical records, or insurance letters. We then give an honest assessment of whether a dangerous roadway or public-entity claim may be available under California law.
If you decide to work with us and the scope of representation is signed, we begin a focused investigation into both the crash and the roadway. That can include visiting and photographing the scene, documenting sight lines and lighting, measuring lanes and shoulders, and identifying anything that may have contributed (missing signs, obstructed views, confusing markings, guardrail gaps, edge drop-offs, or construction zone issues). We also obtain police reports and interview witnesses and first responders.
Next, we obtain public records from the agencies responsible for the roadway—such as design plans, “as-built” drawings, traffic studies, speed surveys, maintenance and trimming logs, and prior collision data. We work with traffic and highway-safety engineers, human-factors experts, accident reconstructionists, and medical specialists to analyze how the roadway was designed and maintained, how the crash unfolded, and what reasonable engineering or maintenance measures could have reduced the risk.
Using the facts and expert analysis, we evaluate whether the roadway meets California’s definition of a “dangerous condition of public property,” who is responsible for it, and how to navigate public-entity defenses like design immunity. We identify all potentially liable parties—such as cities, counties, state agencies, contractors, and any negligent drivers involved—and determine what claims and notices must be filed, including any required government claim under the Government Claims Act.
We work with you and your medical providers to understand the full impact of the crash—your injuries, treatment, future medical needs, time away from work, and changes to your daily life and family responsibilities. We organize this information into a clear presentation that combines liability evidence (engineering, design, maintenance, and crash history) with your damages. We then handle communications and negotiations with the public entity, contractors, and insurers involved.
If a fair resolution cannot be reached through negotiation, we are prepared to file a lawsuit and, if necessary, take your case to trial. Litigation in dangerous roadway cases can involve written discovery, depositions of public-entity representatives, engineers, contractors, and experts, motion practice over immunities and defenses, and detailed pre-trial preparation. At trial, we work to tell your story—using photos, diagrams, design plans, maintenance records, crash data, and expert testimony—to show how the roadway was unsafe, how that condition contributed to the crash, and what the incident has meant for you and your family.
California dangerous roadway cases often involve claims that a public entity created or allowed a “dangerous condition of public property” and failed to fix it or warn about it in time. These claims are governed by the Government Claims Act and related statutes and have stricter rules and deadlines than many other personal injury cases.
Under California Government Code section 835, a public entity can be liable for injuries caused by a dangerous condition of its property when certain requirements are met. A “dangerous condition” generally means a defect or condition that creates a substantial (not trivial) risk of injury when the property is used with due care in a reasonably foreseeable way.
In roadway cases, examples of conditions that may be alleged as “dangerous” include:
Whether something rises to the level of a “dangerous condition” is fact-specific and often requires expert analysis.
To recover against a public entity for a dangerous roadway condition under Government Code section 835, an injured person generally must prove:
In many cases, there may also be fault on the part of a driver or other party. California’s comparative negligence rules allow responsibility to be divided among multiple defendants (and sometimes the injured person), rather than all-or-nothing.
Public entities often raise design immunity as a defense in dangerous roadway cases. Under Government Code section 830.6, a public entity may be immune from liability for injuries caused by a plan or design of a roadway or other public improvement if it can prove that:
Design immunity is an affirmative defense, meaning the public entity has the burden to prove it. It is also not a blanket shield in every situation. Courts have recognized that design immunity may not apply—or may be lost—when conditions have significantly changed since the original design, when the entity has notice that a design has become dangerous, or when the issue is not the design itself but the failure to provide adequate warnings about a known hazard.
Evaluating whether design immunity applies in a particular case is highly fact-specific and often requires review of design plans, approval records, crash history, and expert testimony.
Yes. Many dangerous roadway cases involve shared fault between a public entity and one or more drivers. For example, a driver may be speeding or distracted, while a dangerous curve, unprotected drop-off, obstructed sight line, or unsafe crosswalk design turns a mistake into a catastrophic or fatal crash.
In those situations, California’s comparative negligence system allows a jury to assign percentages of fault to each responsible party—such as the driver, the public entity, and sometimes others (like contractors or property owners)—and any damages awarded are allocated accordingly. The fact that a driver made an error does not necessarily eliminate a claim against a public entity if the roadway condition also played a substantial role.
When a dangerous roadway or crosswalk is found to be a substantial factor in causing a crash, injured people and families may seek the same types of damages available in other California personal-injury and wrongful-death cases, including:
Economic damages
Non-economic damages
If a crash is fatal, surviving family members may bring wrongful death and related survival claims, which have their own rules about who may file and what can be recovered. In rare cases involving especially egregious conduct, punitive damages may be available against non-public-entity defendants (such as certain private contractors or drivers); punitive damages are generally not available against public entities under California law.
Dangerous roadway cases nearly always involve strict, additional deadlines beyond the usual personal-injury statute of limitations because they are governed by the California Government Claims Act.
In many cases involving personal injury, wrongful death, or damage to personal property caused by a dangerous public roadway:
These claim deadlines work in addition to the general statutes of limitations that apply in California civil cases (such as the two-year limit for many personal-injury claims and the three-year limit for many property-damage claims). Missing the government-claim deadline can, in many situations, completely bar a dangerous roadway claim against a public entity, even if the normal two-year limitations period has not yet expired.
Because these rules are technical and unforgiving, it is important to talk with an attorney as soon as reasonably possible if you believe a dangerous roadway, intersection, or crosswalk contributed to a crash in or around San Diego County.
Forget surface-level research and mediocre inquiries. We dive deep to conduct extensive investigations and gather evidence in order to build your strongest case.
We use technology to your advantage. By using video and photography, scene recreations, and graphics, we tell your story in a visually-compelling way that other law firms cannot match.
Defense attorneys and insurance companies know us and respect us. We assess the full extent of your damages and pursue all responsible parties in order to maximize the compensation you deserve.
Catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases are rarely simple. We have taken on the largest corporations, insurance companies, and defense firms in the country and won.
We understand how important it is to have a compassionate and considerate lawyer. From providing regular case updates to ensuring clients are adequately prepared for each step of the case, we continually demonstrate our care for all of our clients.
In California, public entities are generally immune from liability for injuries resulting from dangerous conditions on public property. However, there are certain exceptions and defenses available to public entities in dangerous condition of public property lawsuits. These immunity defenses are outlined in the California Government Code and include:
Design Immunity (Government Code Section 830.6)
Public entities are immune from liability for injuries caused by dangerous conditions on public property if the design of the property was approved in advance by the responsible public entity or official and was based on discretionary decisions made with substantial evidence at the time of approval.
Natural Conditions (Government Code Section 831.2)
Public entities are immune from liability for injuries resulting from natural conditions of unimproved public property, such as undeveloped land or wilderness areas, unless the condition created a substantial risk of injury.
Recreational Use Immunity (Government Code Section 831.4)
Public entities are immune from liability for injuries resulting from dangerous conditions on public property intended or maintained for recreational use, such as parks, trails, or playgrounds, unless the injury was caused by a known dangerous condition for which no warning was provided.
Trail Immunity (Government Code Section 831.7)
Trail immunity specifically applies to public trails and provides immunity from liability for injuries resulting from dangerous conditions on the trail unless the condition was caused by a known dangerous condition for which no warning was provided, or the injury resulted from willful or malicious conduct.
A roadway, intersection, or crosswalk may be considered “dangerous” under California law when it creates a substantial, not trivial, risk of injury to people using it with reasonable care in a foreseeable way. That can include design issues, visibility problems, missing or confusing signs, or unsafe features that turn a driver’s mistake into a catastrophic crash.
Examples include poorly designed or marked intersections, unprotected high-speed crosswalks, obstructed sight lines, missing guardrails where vehicles can drop off steep embankments, abrupt pavement edges, unsafe shoulders, and confusing or inadequately controlled construction zones. Whether something qualifies as a “dangerous condition of public property” is fact-specific and often requires expert analysis.
Sometimes it’s obvious that another driver did something wrong—but a closer look shows the road itself made the situation much more dangerous than it needed to be. Signs that a dangerous roadway may have played a role include:
If you suspect something about the roadway felt unsafe before the crash—or others have complained about the same spot—it’s worth having a dangerous roadway attorney evaluate whether the road itself may be partly to blame.
In many cases, yes. California law allows injured people and families to bring claims against public entities, including cities, counties, and state agencies such as Caltrans, when a dangerous condition of public property is a substantial factor in causing a crash. These cases are governed by the Government Claims Act and have additional requirements and shorter deadlines than typical injury claims.
To succeed, you generally must show that a dangerous condition existed, that it created a foreseeable risk of the type of harm that occurred, that the public entity either created the condition or knew (or should have known) about it in time to fix or warn about it, and that the condition was a substantial factor in causing the injuries. An attorney experienced with dangerous roadway cases can help evaluate whether these elements may be met in your situation.
If you suspect the roadway, intersection, or crosswalk contributed to the crash, it’s important to:
Because dangerous roadway cases often involve public-entity claims with strict deadlines, it’s wise to talk with a lawyer as soon as reasonably possible so that key evidence can be preserved and required notices can be filed on time.
Common dangerous roadway issues include:
A thorough investigation by engineers and accident reconstructionists is often needed to determine whether these conditions meet California’s definition of a dangerous condition of public property.
There is no single timeline. Dangerous roadway cases are often more complex and take longer than a typical two-car collision because they involve:
Some cases can resolve within a year or two once liability and damages are fully developed. Others—especially those involving catastrophic injuries, disputed liability, or complex design-immunity issues—can take longer and may require going all the way to trial. A lawyer familiar with these cases can give you a more specific sense of timing after learning the details of your situation.
ou are not required to hire an attorney, but dangerous roadway cases are among the most complex personal-injury matters. They involve public-entity procedures, engineering and human-factors evidence, design-immunity defenses, and strict claim deadlines that are easy to miss if you’re not familiar with them.
Many firms, including Hulburt Law Firm, handle these cases on a contingency fee basis. That typically means:
Case costs (such as court filing fees, expert costs, and records charges) are often advanced by the firm and reimbursed from any settlement or verdict, as explained in the written fee agreement.
Simply fill out the form or call 619.821.0500 to receive a free case review. We’ll evaluate what happened, your injuries, and potential defendants to determine how we can best help you.