On April 29, 2022 a
Motion,Ex Parte
was filed
involving a dispute between
Eminzade, Nigar,
Rodenas, Gunnar,
and
County Of San Bernardino,
Does 1 To 20,
Lee, Elizabeth,
for Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
247 West Third Street
San Bernardino, California 92415-0210
F i
SU‘WWOR COURT
L E D
‘
“W
L:
"
DMNARDINO
'
?'EESTRQCT
mVODCh-bOONA
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
11 GUNNAR RODENAS, et a|., CASE NO. C|V882208980
P'a'm'fis’
12 RULING 0N DEMURRER To
vs. SECOND AND THIRD CAUSES 0F
13
ACTION 0F PLAINTIFF’s
ELIZABETH LEE, et aI.,
14 COMPLAINT
Defendants.
15
Date: October 20, 2022
16 Time: 8:30 A.M.
Department: S32
17
18
19
20
21
22 After full consideration of the written and oral submissions by the parties,
23 the Court rules as follows:
24 CASE BACKGROUND
25 This is a motor vehicle accident with claims against the County of San
26 Bernardino (“County”) for dangerous condition of public property.
27 According to the Complaint filed on April 29, 2022, Plaintiffs Gunnar
28 Rodenas (driver) and Nigar Eminzade (passenger) were in a 2017 Volkswagen
Page 1 of 6
Golf, driving eastbound on Sand Canyon Road on June 29, 2021 at 9:30 p.m.
(Complaint, 1m 13-15.)
Defendant Elizabeth Lee (“Lee”) was travelling at an excessive speed on
San Canyon Road and lost control .4 miles east of Reservoir Canal Road, where
mVODCDAOONA
there was a sharp curve.
Lee crossed a double yellow line into eastbound traffic and hit Plaintiffs
head-on. (11 16.)
Sand Canyon Road has two traffic lanes each for eastbound and
westbound traffic, delineated by broken white lines.
The eastbound lanes are separate from the westbound lands by a solid
11 double yellow line.
12 The location of the collision was near a curve and controlled by a posted
13 50 mph maximum speed limit.
14 There is no guardrail, median or divider to prevent cross—over collisions.
15 Additionally, the location had inadequate lighting and lacked proper
16 signage to warn drivers to reduce speed for the upcoming sharp curve.
17 Finally, this area of Sand Canyon Road (between Campus Drive and
18 Crafton Avenue) was weII-known as an area where motorists traveled at
19 dangerously high speeds yet County took no action. (Complaint, 1111 17-20.)
20 The complaint alleges negligence against Defendant Lee (1st cause of
21 action) which is not at issue here.
22 The 2nd cause of action alleges Dangerous Condition of Public Property
23 against the County, primarily based on the lack of signage warning of the sharp
24 curve.
25 The 3rd cause of action alleges Negligence — Vicarious Liability, for the
26 County’s employees’ failure to remediate the dangerous condition.
27 The County demurrers to the 2nd and 3rd causes of action.
28 An Opposition and a Reply have been filed.
Page 2 of 6
Document Filed Date
October 20, 2022
Case Filing Date
April 29, 2022
Category
Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SAN BERNARDINO SUPERIOR COURT COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 247 West Third Street San Bernardino, California 92415-0210 F i SU‘WWOR COURT L E D ‘ “W L: " DMNARDINO ' ?'EESTRQCT mVODCh-bOONA SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 11 GUNNAR RODENAS, et a|., CASE NO. C|V882208980 P'a'm'fis’ 12 RULING 0N DEMURRER To vs. SECOND AND THIRD CAUSES 0F 13 ACTION 0F PLAINTIFF’s ELIZABETH LEE, et aI., 14 COMPLAINT Defendants. 15 Date: October 20, 2022 16 Time: 8:30 A.M. Department: S32 17 18 19 20 21 22 After full consideration of the written and oral submissions by the parties, 23 the Court rules as follows: 24 CASE BACKGROUND 25 This is a motor vehicle accident with claims against the County of San 26 Bernardino (“County”) for dangerous condition of public property. 27 According to the Complaint filed on April 29, 2022, Plaintiffs Gunnar 28 Rodenas (driver) and Nigar Eminzade (passenger) were in a 2017 Volkswagen Page 1 of 6 Golf, driving eastbound on Sand Canyon Road on June 29, 2021 at 9:30 p.m. (Complaint, 1m 13-15.) Defendant Elizabeth Lee (“Lee”) was travelling at an excessive speed on San Canyon Road and lost control .4 miles east of Reservoir Canal Road, where mVODCDAOONA there was a sharp curve. Lee crossed a double yellow line into eastbound traffic and hit Plaintiffs head-on. (11 16.) Sand Canyon Road has two traffic lanes each for eastbound and westbound traffic, delineated by broken white lines. The eastbound lanes are separate from the westbound lands by a solid 11 double yellow line. 12 The location of the collision was near a curve and controlled by a posted 13 50 mph maximum speed limit. 14 There is no guardrail, median or divider to prevent cross—over collisions. 15 Additionally, the location had inadequate lighting and lacked proper 16 signage to warn drivers to reduce speed for the upcoming sharp curve. 17 Finally, this area of Sand Canyon Road (between Campus Drive and 18 Crafton Avenue) was weII-known as an area where motorists traveled at 19 dangerously high speeds yet County took no action. (Complaint, 1111 17-20.) 20 The complaint alleges negligence against Defendant Lee (1st cause of 21 action) which is not at issue here. 22 The 2nd cause of action alleges Dangerous Condition of Public Property 23 against the County, primarily based on the lack of signage warning of the sharp 24 curve. 25 The 3rd cause of action alleges Negligence — Vicarious Liability, for the 26 County’s employees’ failure to remediate the dangerous condition. 27 The County demurrers to the 2nd and 3rd causes of action. 28 An Opposition and a Reply have been filed. Page 2 of 6