Hulburt Law Firm represents people and families in catastrophic injury and wrongful death cases involving dangerous roads throughout San Diego County. Attorney Conor Hulburt served as lead trial counsel in a case that secured a $28.16 million jury verdict against Caltrans for a boy struck while using a dangerous crosswalk.
We investigate roadway design, maintenance records, and what public agencies knew about a hazard to build the evidence needed to hold responsible parties accountable.
Injured by a dangerous road? We can help.

We handle serious injury and wrongful death cases involving unsafe roads, intersections, crosswalks, and work zones throughout San Diego County. A dangerous condition may cause a collision or worsen the injuries. For example, when a missing guardrail leaves a steep roadside drop-off unprotected. Our cases include:
Some intersections and crosswalks are dangerous because of their design, location, traffic speed, visibility, or lack of adequate traffic control. These cases may involve high-speed crossings, confusing right-of-way, inadequate signals, missing pedestrian protections, poor maintenance, or a history of prior crashes or complaints.
Learn more about who is liable for a dangerous intersection accident.
Temporary lane shifts, confusing signs, misplaced barriers, unmarked pavement changes, and unsafe pedestrian detours can put road users at risk. We investigate the traffic-control plan, how the work zone was actually maintained, and which contractors or public agencies were responsible for the condition.
Potholes, broken pavement, uneven asphalt, loose gravel, debris, failed repairs, and deteriorated shoulders can create serious hazards for drivers, motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. These cases often require evidence of how long the defect existed, whether prior complaints or crashes occurred, and whether the responsible public entity or contractor had a reasonable opportunity to repair the condition or warn road users.
Dangerous roadway design can make a crash more likely or make the injuries far worse. These cases may involve unsafe curves, confusing lane transitions, inadequate shoulders, steep embankments, missing or defective guardrails, poor drainage, unsafe median openings, or abrupt pavement edge drop-offs. They often require engineering analysis, design plans, collision history, maintenance records, and careful evaluation of public-entity defenses such as design immunity.
When the dangerous road is a state highway, see whether you can sue Caltrans.
Missing, confusing, obscured, or poorly placed signs and signals can make intersections, crosswalks, and roadways unreasonably dangerous. These cases may involve inadequate warning signs, unsafe signal timing, malfunctioning traffic lights, faded lane markings, blocked sight lines, poor lighting, or vegetation, poles, walls, parked vehicles, or other obstructions that prevent road users from seeing and reacting in time.
A speeding, distracted, or careless driver may share responsibility with the public entity or contractor responsible for an unsafe roadway. We investigate how the driver’s conduct and the road condition each contributed to the crash or the severity of the injuries, so potentially responsible parties are identified early.
Conor Hulburt and Leslie Hulburt represent people and families facing catastrophic injuries and wrongful death. In dangerous roadway cases, they work to uncover how the road contributed to the harm, what the responsible agency knew, and whether reasonable safety measures could have prevented the injury.
Conor served as lead trial counsel in Quiroz v. Caltrans, obtaining a $28.16 million jury verdict for a 13-year-old boy struck while using a dangerous crosswalk. The case required detailed investigation, engineering testimony, and evidence of Caltrans’s own policies to establish responsibility despite the agency’s efforts to blame the driver and invoke government immunities.
Leslie brings substantial litigation and trial experience to the firm’s serious injury cases. Her work includes developing the facts, expert evidence, and legal arguments needed to present complex claims clearly. Together, Conor and Leslie prepare cases to address public-entity defenses and demonstrate the full impact of an injury on the client and family.

Our attorneys have obtained significant results in dangerous roadway and wrongful death cases, including the examples below. Every case is different, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Jury verdict against Caltrans for a 13-year-old boy who suffered a catastrophic brain injury after he was struck by a vehicle while using a dangerous crosswalk.
Rough asphalt on a race route significantly reduced tire traction, causing a racer to lose control of his vehicle and suffer fatal injuries.
Settlement against Caltrans and others for a cyclist who was struck from behind on State Route 67 and suffered a severe traumatic brain injury.
We listen to what happened and review available reports, photographs, and other information to assess whether the roadway contributed to the crash or injuries. We also identify potential defendants and any urgent claim deadlines.
Roadway evidence can change quickly. Potholes are repaired, vegetation is trimmed, and work zones disappear. When appropriate, we inspect the scene, document the hazard, locate witnesses, and send preservation requests before important evidence is lost.
We seek design plans, maintenance records, prior complaints, collision history, and other agency documents. These records can help establish who was responsible for the roadway and what they knew about the danger before the crash.
We work with engineers, accident reconstructionists, and other specialists as the case requires. Their analysis helps explain how the roadway contributed to the harm and whether reasonable safety measures could have prevented it.
We prepare required government claims and pursue the responsible parties. As the case develops, we address liability defenses and document the full extent of the client’s injuries, losses, and future care needs.
We prepare the evidence for a clear presentation in settlement negotiations and, when necessary, at trial. That preparation connects the roadway hazard, the responsible parties’ conduct, and the lasting impact on the client and family.
Claims against a city, county, or Caltrans involve special liability rules, government defenses, and claim deadlines. A successful case requires evidence connecting the roadway condition to the injury and establishing the public entity’s legal responsibility.
Under Government Code section 830, a dangerous condition creates a substantial risk of injury when the property or adjacent property is used with due care in a reasonably foreseeable way. A minor imperfection does not necessarily qualify, and a crash alone does not establish that a road was legally dangerous.
Government Code section 835 generally requires proof that:
These requirements make agency records and engineering evidence central to the case. Design plans can explain how a crossing was configured. Maintenance records, complaints, and prior incidents may help establish notice. Expert analysis can show how the condition contributed to the injury and how appropriate safeguards could have prevented it.
Our investigation focuses on developing evidence for each required element and anticipating the defenses the public entity may raise.
Public entities often raise design immunity under Government Code section 830.6. This defense can protect an agency from liability for injuries caused by an approved roadway design, even when that design is alleged to be dangerous.
The public entity generally must establish:
Evaluating the defense requires examining the actual plans, approval records, and roadway—not simply accepting an agency’s assertion that its design was approved.
Design immunity can also be lost when changed physical conditions make the design dangerous, the agency has notice, and the requirements concerning time to remedy the condition or provide adequate warnings are met.
A separate failure-to-warn claim may remain available even when design immunity applies. In Tansavatdi v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes, the California Supreme Court confirmed that design immunity does not automatically bar such a claim. The claim must still satisfy its own legal requirements; a missing warning sign alone does not establish liability.
We examine the design history, changes at the location, and evidence of known hazards to determine how these rules apply to each case.
Yes. A driver’s negligence and a dangerous roadway condition can combine to cause serious injuries. For example, a driver may cause a vehicle to leave its lane, while an unsafe roadside condition makes the resulting injuries more severe.
A public entity does not avoid responsibility simply because a driver was also negligent. The injured person must still establish that the property was legally dangerous, that the condition contributed to the injury, and that the other requirements for public-entity liability are met.
When multiple parties are responsible, California law distinguishes between economic and noneconomic damages. Liable defendants may be jointly responsible for economic losses, such as medical expenses and lost earnings. Each defendant generally pays noneconomic damages, such as pain and suffering, according to its percentage of fault. An injured person’s own comparative fault can also reduce recovery.
We investigate both the driving conduct and the roadway condition to identify the responsible parties and determine how each contributed to the harm.
Compensation depends on the injuries, the evidence, and the parties’ legal responsibility. In a serious injury case, recoverable damages may include:
When a crash is fatal, eligible family members may pursue wrongful-death damages, including lost financial support, household services, funeral and burial expenses, and loss of the person’s love, companionship, comfort, and guidance. A separate survival claim may address losses suffered by the person before death.
We build the damages evidence through medical records, employment information, testimony about daily life, and qualified experts when needed. For catastrophic injuries, that may include a life-care plan and an assessment of future care costs and lost earning capacity.
Punitive damages are not recoverable against a public entity such as a city, county, or Caltrans.
A claim against a city, county, or Caltrans generally requires presenting a government claim before filing a lawsuit. Two separate deadlines matter:
Presenting the government claim. Under Government Code section 911.2, claims involving personal injury or wrongful death generally must be presented to the appropriate public entity within six months after the cause of action accrues. In many injury cases, that period begins on the date of the incident.
Filing the lawsuit. If the entity provides a written rejection notice that complies with the statutory requirements, you generally have six months from the date the notice is personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file suit. If no compliant written notice is provided, Government Code section 945.6 generally allows two years from accrual to file suit. That longer lawsuit period does not eliminate the initial government-claim requirement.
Claims against private drivers, contractors, or other defendants may follow different deadlines. Identifying every potentially responsible party early helps protect each claim.
If six months have already passed, seek legal advice promptly. Limited procedures may permit a late government claim, but additional deadlines and eligibility requirements apply. Do not assume that a claim is either preserved or barred without reviewing the specific facts.
We examine the roadway, agency records, and crash evidence to uncover overlooked hazards and identify who was responsible.
We use photographs, video, graphics, and expert analysis to explain complex roadway hazards and show how they contributed to the injury.
We document how the injury affects your independence, work, and daily life, including future treatment and care costs.
Conor Hulburt obtained a $28.16 million jury verdict against Caltrans as lead trial counsel, experience that informs our preparation and strategy.
Conor and Leslie stay involved in your case, explain important decisions, and take time to understand your family’s needs.
Public entities may raise several statutory defenses, depending on the location and the alleged hazard:
An agency’s assertion of immunity does not resolve the case. We examine the plans, approval records, roadway conditions, and applicable law to determine whether the defense applies and whether a separate basis for liability remains available.
A dangerous roadway condition creates a substantial risk of injury when the road or adjacent property is used with reasonable care in a foreseeable way. Minor imperfections do not necessarily qualify.
Examples may include an unsafe crosswalk, obstructed sight line, defective shoulder, or hazardous road surface. Whether a particular condition meets the legal standard depends on its physical characteristics and the surrounding circumstances. A crash alone does not establish that the road was legally dangerous.
For a data-driven look at where these crashes concentrate, see San Diego's most dangerous roads.
Signs worth investigating include:
These facts do not establish liability by themselves, and a roadway claim may exist even without prior reported crashes. Reviewing the scene, agency records, and expert analysis can help determine whether the road contributed to the collision or the severity of the injuries.
Yes, when the facts satisfy California’s requirements for public-entity liability. A claim may involve a city, county, or Caltrans if a dangerous condition of property it owned or controlled contributed to your injury.
You generally must show that an employee negligently or wrongfully created the condition while acting within the scope of employment, or that the entity had sufficient notice to take protective measures. Government immunities may also affect the claim.
Before filing suit, you generally must present a government claim within six months after the cause of action accrues. Identifying the correct entity and protecting that deadline are essential early steps.
Responsibility may rest with Caltrans, a city, the county, or a private owner. Contractors may also be responsible for hazards created during construction or maintenance.
Different parties can control different features at the same location, such as the pavement, traffic signals, vegetation, or a temporary work zone. The road’s location alone may not identify everyone responsible.
We review ownership records, maintenance agreements, project documents, and other evidence to determine who controlled the condition and had responsibility for addressing it.
Get medical attention and prioritize your safety. If you can do so safely:
Do not enter traffic or return to an unsafe location to collect evidence. Contact an attorney promptly so the roadway can be investigated, evidence preserved, and any government-claim deadlines addressed.
Timing depends on the complexity of the case, the injuries, and whether responsibility is disputed. Roadway cases often require agency records, engineering analysis, and litigation over government defenses.
Some resolve through settlement; others require trial and potentially an appeal. Understanding future medical needs can also take time. We explain the likely stages of your case and keep you informed as it progresses.
You are not required to hire an attorney, but roadway claims can involve government deadlines, engineering evidence, and immunity defenses. An attorney experienced in these cases can investigate the hazard, identify responsible parties, and protect your claim.
Hulburt Law Firm handles these cases on a contingency-fee basis: you pay no attorney fees unless we recover compensation for you. Case costs, such as expert fees and records expenses, are separate. We explain how fees and costs are handled in the written agreement before representation begins.
Hulburt Law Firm represents people and families in serious injury and wrongful death cases involving dangerous roads throughout San Diego County, including North County, coastal communities, East County, and the South Bay.

Simply fill out the form or call 619.821.0500 to receive a free case review. We’ll evaluate what happened, your injuries, and potential defendants to determine how we can best help you.