Bettencourt v. California Toll Bridge Authority

California Court of Appeal

Bettencourt v. California Toll Bridge Authority

266 P.2d 205, 123 Cal. App. 2d 943, 1954 Cal. App. LEXIS 1281

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedFebruary 4, 1954

DocketCiv. No. 15755

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 266 P.2d 205 (Bettencourt v. California Toll Bridge Authority) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bettencourt v. California Toll Bridge Authority, 266 P.2d 205, 123 Cal. App. 2d 943, 1954 Cal. App. LEXIS 1281 (Cal. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

BRAY, J.

Plaintiff appeals from judgments in favor of defendant California Toll Bridge Authority and defendant Department of Public Works sustaining demurrers without leave to amend to the complaint described in Bettencourt v. State, No. 15668, this day decided by us, ante, p. 60 [266 P.2d 201]. These appeals are companion appeals to the one there considered.

Defendants Toll Bridge Authority and Department of Public Works are agencies of the State of California. (Gov. Code, §§ 14000-14005; Sts. & Hy. Code, § 30000 et seq.) Such agencies are really the State of California and if the state is immune from claims of negligence the agencies likewise are immune. (Fowler v. California Toll Bridge Authority, 46 F.Supp. 299; Talley v. Northern San Diego Hosp. Dist., 41 Cal.2d 33 [257 P.2d 22].)

On the authority of the companion appeal to the effect that the State of California enjoys sovereign immunity as to claims for negligence in the operation of the Dumbarton Bridge, the judgments are affirmed.

Peters, P. J. and Wood (Fred B.), J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI