Opinion ID: 2209506
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Determinations Regarding Negligence

Text: Given the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions regarding the State's duty, the trial court held that the State was negligent in two respects. First, the trial court determined that the State failed to maintain the surface of Highway 136 in the vicinity of the accident and that this negligence facilitated the pooling of water, which created a hazard to drivers. Second, the trial court determined that the State was negligent in failing to warn drivers of the existence of the headwall or to take appropriate action with respect to the location of the headwall of the culvert to minimize the danger posed by the culvert headwall. The trial court found that Woollen was contributorily negligent in failing to maintain an adequate lookout, in failing to maintain control of his vehicle, and in traveling at an unsafe rate of speed. The trial court found that Woollen was responsible for 40 percent of the negligence that proximately caused the accident and that the State was responsible for the remaining 60 percent. The trial court apportioned liability for the accident's occurrence and Woollen's resultant damages according to these percentages.