00675342

Component

http://onlinepubs.trb.org...trr/1994/1445/1445-018.pdf

https://scholar.google.co...rtin&publication_year=1994

The legal implications of the design exception process in the context of tort liability and tort litigation are examined. Only six states currently report that their highway or transportation departments are immune from suit by motorists injured as a result of alleged defects of the highway. In those states susceptible to suit, the alleged defect may well be a design defect. In such cases the application of design standards and adequate justification of any deviation from the applicable standard become paramount in the defense of the lawsuit. A brief introduction to the notion of sovereign immunity of state governments and some of the important concepts of tort law are offered. Within this context the relationship of design standards to legal notice of highway hazards is explored, and the significance of departure from those standards is explained. Recommendations for the designer are provided. The author's experience, since 1987, as a member of the legal staff of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation involved in the risk management training and education of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation employees is used as the basis. The recommendations are based on those made to Pennsylvania highway designers and design liaison engineers.

This paper appears in Transportation Research Record No. 1445, Cross Section and Alinement Design Issues. Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved

01401257

English

p. 156-159

1994

Transportation Research Record

0309060516

References (4)

Defects; Design standards; Highway departments; Highway design; Highway law; Legal factors; Litigation; Negligence; Sovereign immunity; State government; Tort liability

Design exceptions

Design; Highways; Law; Security and Emergencies; I20: Design and Planning of Transport Infrastructure

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Mar 20 1995 12:00AM

• ACCIDENT RELATIONSHIPS OF ROADWAY WIDTH ON LOW-VOLUME ROADS
• ANALYSIS OF INFLUENCE OF PERCEPTION-REACTION TIME ON CASE III INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
• ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT PRACTICE IN SELECTION AND DESIGN OF URBAN MEDIANS TO BENEFIT PEDESTRIANS
• COORDINATION OF HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALINEMENT WITH REGARD TO HIGHWAY ESTHETICS
• CROSS SECTIONS OF HIGH-OCCUPANCY-VEHICLE LANES ON FREEWAYS AND ARTERIALS
• CURVILINEAR ALINEMENT: AN IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR MORE CONSISTENT AND SAFER ROAD CHARACTERISTIC
• DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR HIGHWAY REVERSE CURVES
• DESIGN CONSISTENCY AND DRIVER ERROR
• EFFECT OF URBAN AND SUBURBAN MEDIAN TYPES ON BOTH VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
• ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN IN WESTERN EUROPE BASED ON A GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM
• EVALUATING THE QUALITY OF CITIES' GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS
• FACTORS AFFECTING SELECTION OF LANE WIDTH AND SHOULDER WIDTH ON URBAN FREEWAYS
• GEOMETRICALLY INDUCED ROUGHNESS AT GRADE BREAKS
• GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT-TURN LANES ON URBAN ROADWAYS
• HORIZONTAL CURVE DESIGN FOR PASSENGER CARS AND TRUCKS
• HORIZONTAL CURVE DESIGN: AN EXERCISE IN COMFORT AND APPEARANCE
• MINIMUM HORIZONTAL CURVE RADIUS AS FUNCTION OF GRADE INCURRED BY VEHICLE MOTION IN DRIVING MODE
• NEW AND IMPROVED UNSYMMETRICAL VERTICAL CURVE FOR HIGHWAYS
• PROCEDURE FOR DETECTING ERRORS IN ALINEMENT DESIGN AND CONSEQUENCES FOR SAFER REDESIGN
• SAFETY ASPECTS OF INDIVIDUAL DESIGN ELEMENTS AND THEIR INTERACTIONS ON TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS: INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE
• THREE-DIMENSIONAL ANALYSIS OF SIGHT DISTANCE ON INTERCHANGE CONNECTORS
• TRANSPORT OF MANUFACTURED HOUSING UNITS: DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF 4.27-M (14-FT)-WIDE AND 4.88-M (16-FT)-WIDE UNITS ON TRAFFIC