AMANDA GAUGHRAN VS. COUNTY OF WARREN(L-0242-13, WARREN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-4207-15T1
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Aug 7, 2017Background
- On July 4, 2011 Amanda Gaughran was injured at the annual Orange Crate Derby in Washington Borough when a contestant’s crate hit a road defect, veered into hay bales, and a bale struck plaintiff seated behind them.
- The derby was organized by a nonprofit committee (Washington Celebrates America); the Committee obtained Borough permission, placed hay bales, and claimed responsibility for spectator safety and crowd control.
- Washington Township provided police services under an agreement with the Committee; Township Sgt. Duckworth was present operating a radar gun and testified he did not actively engage in crowd control unless asked.
- Plaintiff alleged the Township/police negligently failed to protect spectators or warn that plaintiff sat in an unsafe area, and alleged the Borough negligently inspected/maintained the roadway (dangerous condition: an uneven manhole/pothole allegedly present for 15 years).
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Borough, Township, and Township Police Department; the Appellate Division affirmed, applying the Tort Claims Act (TCA) immunity provisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether police (Township/PD) lost TCA immunity for negligent performance of ministerial duties (N.J.S.A. 59:5-4) | Gaughran: police had a duty to protect/warn spectators and failed to ensure plaintiff sat in a safe (curbed) spot behind hay bales | Township/PD: N.J.S.A. 59:5-4 immunizes failure to provide police protection; no competent proof police had a ministerial duty to plaintiff or interacted with her pre-accident | Held: Immunity applies — no competent evidence police undertook or negligently performed a ministerial duty toward plaintiff; police actions were discretionary/patrol and were insufficient to defeat §59:5-4 immunity |
| Whether Borough is liable under TCA for a dangerous condition on public property (N.J.S.A. 59:4-2) | Gaughran: road defect (uneven manhole/pothole) created foreseeable risk to racers/spectators; Borough failed to inspect/repair despite long existence | Borough: inspections occurred before event; no actual or constructive notice; even if notice, failure to repair was not palpably unreasonable | Held: Plaintiff failed to prove actual or constructive notice, or that Borough’s inaction was palpably unreasonable; summary judgment affirmed |
| Competency of plaintiff’s evidence (lay testimony, expert report) to create triable issues | Gaughran relied on Borough clerk’s “information and belief,” derby brochure, and expert’s net opinions asserting negligence | Defendants: clerk’s statements were hearsay/assumptions and expert offered bare conclusions without applicable standards or analysis | Held: Clerk’s answers and expert’s net opinions are not competent to defeat summary judgment |
| Applicability of precedents (Suarez/Aversano) to impose liability for police conduct | Gaughran: Suarez/Aversano show police can be liable for negligent response/rescue decisions | Defendants: those cases involved police who were on scene and undertook concrete rescue/response duties; here police had no comparable involvement pre-injury | Held: Those precedents are inapposite; here police were not on-scene performing duties that led to the injury |
Key Cases Cited
- Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (standards for summary judgment)
- Polzo v. County of Essex, 209 N.J. 51 (TCA dangerous-condition framework and notice/palpably-unreasonable analysis)
- Kolitch v. Lindedahl, 100 N.J. 485 (TCA: immunity as dominant consideration)
- Suarez v. Dosky, 171 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div.) (police-response liability for negligent performance of ministerial duties)