Highway Safety - Why if it is negligent can't I sue the State of Iowa?
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 335
Rex non potest peccare!
Yesterday we reported on an interstate accident where one driver heading in the wrong direction on one side of the divided highway caused three other trucks to crash. You might wonder, like wrong-site surgery, how this might happen and ask yourself the question: Is this negligence? If you were the one injured by the man and the tortfeasor has little in the way of assets or insurance you might ask if his negligence were caused or contributed to by the state highway signs and if that is enough to sue the State of Iowa?
First, is this negligence by the driver?
Well the answer to that question all depends on why he drove the wrong way. Signs directing traffic flow can be confusing or missing due to vandalism. Not being able to understand the sign, due to language barriers will not save the driver from being found negligent. Nor will drinking and driving while intoxicated. A good investigation might show the signs in question were not properly lit due to a variety of reasons. Those may include the car’s lights not being bright enough. Or it could be the sign’s placement places it outside of the night lighting and therefore is invisible. The driver may himself have been confused for various reasons or distracted by someone in the car or otherwise. It could be the driver didn't take enough time to study an unfamiliar location. If the driver wasn't wearing his eye glasses he could be found negligent. On the other hand the evidence could show his glasses were broke, making them useless, and then we'd have to know more about the timing of them being broken. Was there time to have them repaired or his vision so impaired without them that he should have known better than to drive without them. Then of course he could have been rushing someone to the hospital or tending to a medical emergency which might explain a lot although I dare say it probably wouldn't excuse his negligence.
Can I sue the State of Iowa?
It's all about the driver's duty to obey the laws of the road, to drive using due care and while maintaining a proper lookout. But when the state is involved, such as when there is a highway sign issue, there may be negligence but you can't sue the State of Iowa. In other words the State of Iowa can be negligent all it wants to but take away your right to sue it. So assuming there is confusion created by the highway design or the selection of signs is the State of Iowa negligent; and does that negligence excuse any fault on the part of the driver who got confused and drove the wrong way on the wrong side of the highway?
Wrong question, the correct question is: Is this actionable negligence?
Finding the State of Iowa at fault for highway design or signage issues is nearly impossible since they amended the law making discretionary measures outside of the area where the State can be found negligent. The old saying, “The King Can Do No Wrong” is old and still applies today. The State of Iowa may have been negligent but not all of the negligence of state employees is actionable. In other words the saying should go, “The King Might Do Wrong but in This Instances YouAin’t Suing!”
The State of Iowa gets to say when it can be sued for doing wrong. The Iowa Legislature passes laws that giveth and taketh away the right to sue the State. The legislature decides in what instances people injured by the State of Iowa will be allowed to collect money damages. So you might be injured and even if caused by a negligent action of the State or its employees, you can’t always sue and have a viable cause of action.
Is this fair that the King can do no wrong?
If you’re the injured party chances are you’ll say no. If you’re the State of Iowa trying to balance its budget the policy may seem fair. Tell me what is fair and I can answer that question. In setting state policy fairness many times seems to depend on which side of the lawsuit caption your name is most likely to appear.
If you’re still having problems grasping this concept think like a parent who after punishing their child for swearing, smashes their finger with a hammer and yells out a swear, which the child hears and reminds you of how unfair you are in punishing them but not going to your room. Okay, that’s not the best analogy but you get the idea that as the parent you hold the gold and the golden rule applies. He who owns the gold gets to make the rules.
So can the king do no wrong?
Of course the king can do wrong but unless the king allows you to sue him or the Queen you are out of luck. The law of personal injury is a complicated animal and that’s why law school professors are fond of saying, “The law is a jealous mistress requiring constant courtship.” Today many would say "The King can do no wrong." is not a politically correct statement. It probably never was politically correct. To prove the inaccuracy of the statement one need only know that only men could so stubborn as to know they are heading in the wrong direction but refuse directions while insisting they are right.