Curtis v. City of Visalia
Filed 7/19/06 Curtis v. City of Visalia CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| ALBERT GEORGE CURTIS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF VISALIA, et al., Defendants and Respondents. |
F044621
(Super. Ct. No. 01-197549)
OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Patrick O'Hara, Judge.
Fielder Fielder & Fielder and Scott L. Fielder, Hugh B. Fielder and Barbara Coffman for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Dooley Herr & Peltzer and Leonard C. Herr and Quelie M. Saechao for Defendant and Respondent City of Visalia.
No appearance for Defendant and Respondent Highland Enterprises, Inc.
-ooOoo-
This is an action for personal injuries suffered when a vehicle made a left turn into the path of the plaintiffs' motorcycle. The intersection where the accident occurred was adjacent to a newly developed housing subdivision. The housing developer had promised the city to install signal lights at the intersection by a date that had passed eight months earlier. As a temporary alternative to the signal lights, the city had then arranged with the developer to install a median barrier across the intersection, with left-turn â€
