Marilyn Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs, 2012COA171 (October 11, 2012)

In the movie Philadelphia, Tom Hank’s character first meets his lawyer, Denzel Washington, as Denzel is on the phone with a potential client who wants to sue after stepping into a clearly marked hole in a city street; Denzel suggested he had a case. But, holes in streets are not the same as holes in parking lots. In this case, the trial court concluded the plaintiff could sue for an injury caused by a hole in a public parking lot. The court of appeals disagreed and held a city is immune from suit for injuries occurring in a public parking lot that services a public golf course. Colorado waives governmental immunity for personal injuries, and thus subjects cities to lawsuits for injuries caused by dangerous conditions in any park or recreation area, public streets, or public buildings. A parking lot is none of these, so the city was immune from suit. Plaintiff’s case was dismissed.

http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_Of_Appeals/Opinion/2012/11CA1772-PD.pdf

http://www.cobar.org/opinions/opinion.cfm?opinionid=8696&courtid=1

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Government, Personal Injury, Torts

4 responses to “Marilyn Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs, 2012COA171 (October 11, 2012)

  1. The Court of Appeals followed and applied a 1992 decision by another division that held there is no waiver for public parking facilities. A public parking facility is but a subset of the larger group “any public facility.” Section 24-10-106(1)(e) waives immunity for an injury occurring in any public facility in a park or recreation area. By its plain language, therefore, the public parking facility in the golf course should fall within the expansive waiver for ANY public facility.

    Like

  2. On April 29, 2013, in Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs, 12SC908, the Colorado Supreme Court granted certiorari on the following issue:

    Whether a public golf course parking lot is a ”public facility located in any park or recreation area” under section 24-10-106(1)(e), C.R.S. (2012), of the Colorado Government Immunity Act.

    Like

  3. Pingback: New Certiorari Grant plus a near-grant | Colorado Litigation Report ™

  4. Pingback: Marilyn Daniel v. City of Colorado Springs, 2014CO34 (May 19, 2014). | Colorado Litigation Report ™

Brief this Case

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s