HARTFORD, Conn. (Legal Newsline) - A man who sued a city snowplow driver for knocking loose a manhole cover and causing an accident lost his case after an appeals court ruled he sued the City of New Haven under the wrong statute.
William Dobie was driving to work on his familiar route in January 2011, following a few car lengths behind a municipal snowplow, when his vehicle’s front wheel plunged into an open manhole. He said he observed sparks flying from the plow before the impact and later discovered the manhole cover had been knocked loose. His head hit the steering wheel in the ensuing sudden stop and claimed facial injuries.
Over the objections of the City of New Haven, he sued the snowplow driver for negligence and won a jury verdict. The city moved for a directed verdict on the basis of governmental immunity, then sought to throw out the verdict because the court lacked jurisdiction over the case. The trial judge rejected both motions and the city appealed.
In a May 11 decision, the Connecticut Court of Appeals threw out the jury verdict, agreeing with New Haven that the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.
Under Connecticut law, sovereign immunity protects municipalities against lawsuits over roadway defects unless a statute provides for it. Section 13a-149 provides the exclusive way for plaintiffs to sue over “highway defects,” but it requires them to give notice to the city within 90 days of the accident.
The Connecticut Supreme Court has defined a highway defect as anything “in, upon, or near the traveled path” that obstructs a driver. The question of whether something meets that definition is a question of law for the judge to decide.
The manhole “plainly was an object in the traveled path that necessarily obstructed or hindered the use of the road for the purpose of traveling,” the appeals court ruled. Citing Connecticut Supreme Court precedent, the court added that how the defect got there doesn’t matter, even if it involves negligence by somebody else.
Having sued under the wrong statute and failed to give the city notice within the required time, the plaintiff lost his case.