Court Opinion

ID: 9674969
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:38:07.315492+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:14:43.567471
License: Public Domain

D. F. Walsh, P.J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I concur in the result. I write separately to express my disagreement with the majority’s conclusion that as a matter of law Williams Brothers owed no duty to the public to leave the highway in a safe condition.
In my judgment, even if it were established by proper affidavit that there was no factual dispute as to Williams Brothers’s obligations under its contract with the road commission, Williams Brothers would still owe a duty to the public not to leave the roadway in a dangerous condition without taking some precautions at least to insure that persons using the roadway were adequately warned of the danger and protected from injury. Williams Brothers cannot leave the roadway in a hazardous condition and escape liability for injury that results therefrom merely by proving that, as between itself and a third party, the third party had the contractual obligation to take the necessary precautions to protect the public from injury.