Pasadena Freeway design at fault in fatal crash?

Was bad design work on the historic Pasadena Freeway to blame for the death of a motorist last year? That's the claim in a lawsuit filed this week, which comes amid a project to improve safety on L.A.'s first freeway. From the Star-News:

The family of a Pasadena man who died after his car careened off the Pasadena (110) freeway into the Arroyo Seco Channel is suing the city and county of Los Angeles for wrongful death. The suit, filed last month, claims the city and county acted negligently when they failed to install a barrier along the stretch of the freeway where Ernesto Beltran Sr., 46, lost control of his car and plummeted to his death in February 2007. The state of California is also named as a defendant. More than a year before Beltran's death, an engineer from Caltrans recommended that a safety barrier be constructed along the north 110 near the northbound I-5, according to R. Brian Kramer, an attorney for Hermila Beltran, Ernesto's wife. The barrier has not been built, Kramer said.

— Shelby Grad

Comments

[Joe Q. Logic]

How about people don't blame others for their actions? I'm SURE the facts of the accident support negligence. You're welcome for spending more tax dollars on your grief.

[Ruby Jackson]

How fast was he going?

[Joe Student]

The lawsuit may be moot based on Ledbetter vs Goodyear.
The court set a precedent, where the plaintiff must file suit within a certain amount of time after the act was committed.

The act in the freeway design case would be the construction of the freeway, meaning the statute of limitations has long expired. The precedent would also affect ADA complaints against older buildings and a host of other of other possible claims.
Indeed that is already happening.

Efforts to pass legislation overturning the ruling were stymied in the last congress.
Expect the 11th Congress to remedy this situation.

[the doctor]

If the design was really that defective then more deaths would have occurred by now. But the design is not being blamed for his loss of control. Once he had lost control of the vehicle, death was a possible outcome regardless of whether a guardrail was installed or not. the presence of a guardrail would not have guaranteed that he would have lived inasmuch as the impact to the guardrail could have killed him, or another car close behind or even the possibility that his velocity was such that he would still have been carried over the guardrail. The design met requirements when initially constructed, the fact that improvements can be made does not mean it is unsafe.