Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ducey v. Argo Sales Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 1979No. S.F. 23931Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

CLARK, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

It is obvious to anyone driving our streets, roads and freeways that absent an impenetrable barrier against oncoming traffic, constant risk exists that another vehicle will cross the median line by reason of mechanical defect or careless driving. Designing and building freeways, roads and streets, governmental agencies can, should and do take precautions against risk of injury caused both by negligently built or maintained vehicles and by speeding, drunk and other negligent drivers: However, failure of government to take precautions against such vehicles…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Alarid v. VanierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Baldwin v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Hayes v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API