@article{ref1,
title="Liability for improper traffic signaling, signing, and pavement markings",
journal="Transportation research record",
year="1978",
author="Thomas, Larry W.",
volume="693",
number="",
pages="4-6",
abstract="Court decisions and recent tort claims acts recognize that states and state agencies should not be held liable for negligent performance of governmental functions that are not discretionary in nature. The general view is that the state is not liable for negligence in the performance of functions that involve a high degree of discretion but is liable to negligence in the performance of ministerial or operational level tasks. A case that illustrates executive activity that is discretionary in nature is quoted. Recent decisions hold that negligence in the provision or maintenance of signs, signals for markings is less likely to be protected from liability. Relevant cases are discussed. In order to hold public authorities liable for injuries for failure to exercise ordinary care to keep roads and streets reasonably safe, it must appear that the authority knew or had reasonable cause to know, of the defective condition a sufficient length of time prior to the accident to enable it to repair the road or alleviate the danger. Traffic light cases are also discussed. It is noted that courts have ruled that state rules and regulations governing installation or provision of signs, signals and pavement markings and particularly the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, generally are admissible into evidence.<p />",
language="en",
issn="0361-1981",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}