California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Crow v. State of California, 222 Cal.App.3d 192, 271 Cal.Rptr. 349 (Cal. App. 1990):
In order to determine whether a tort claim may be maintained against a public entity, the paradigm for analysis ordinarily requires we proceed by first identifying a duty on the part of the entity, then ascertain a statutory basis for liability, and then finally determine whether any statutory immunities are applicable. (Rodriquez v. Inglewood Unified School Dist. (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 707, 723, 230 Cal.Rptr. 823.)
But because plaintiff has seemingly predicated his noncontractual claim upon the problematical existence of a dangerous condition of public property, we depart from that paradigm and begin by putting the liability cart before the duty horse. (Cf. Williams v. State of California (1983) 34 Cal.3d 18, 22, 192 Cal.Rptr. 233, 664 P.2d 137.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.