Truman v. Griese

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed summary judgment for a South Dakota Department of Transportation traffic engineer based on sovereign immunity. The court held that duties concerning the placement of warning signs under SDCL 31-28-6 were discretionary rather than ministerial because no specific standard uniform traffic control practice required signs at the intersection.

Holdings

1. The alleged duty to install additional warning signs was discretionary because plaintiffs identified no standard uniform traffic-control practice that specifically required signs at this nonstandard intersection.
2. The evidence did not create a genuine issue of material fact requiring a jury determination because the existence and classification of a governmental duty are legal questions.
3. Sovereign immunity barred plaintiffs' claims arising from the alleged omission of additional warning signs, and summary judgment for defendants was proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether sovereign immunity barred plaintiffs' claims alleging that the DOT traffic engineer failed to install additional warning signs at the Four Corners intersection.
2. Whether the duties imposed by SDCL 31-28-6 to erect and maintain warning signs were ministerial or discretionary under the circumstances.
3. Whether the evidence concerning the intersection's design, the MUTCD, and alleged points of danger created a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment.

Disposition

affirmed