In assessing fault for tort claims, Iowa law exempts municipalities from being assessed a percentage of fault under certain circumstances. One of those situations involves snow and ice removed from “streets.” But does that protection extend to sidewalks?
Here, the plaintiff fell on a city sidewalk in front of a hotel. The trial court jury assessed a percentage of fault to the city and awarded damages to the plaintiff. The main question on appeal is whether Iowa’s municipal immunity law protects cities in maintaining sidewalks. A related question was whether a sidewalk is an extension of a city road.
Iowa law does not define a sidewalk, but several courts have attempted to do so, almost always requiring that the sidewalk be a “part of the street” running alongside the street and that it be “exclusively reserved for pedestrian use.” Under Iowa’s immunity statute, to qualify as a city road or street, it must be a way or place open to public use for the purpose of vehicular traffic.
The court reasoned that the legislature intended to favor a grant of immunity. Therefore, any part of the “tract” owned by the municipality is immune, including sidewalks near streets. In this case, the sidewalk was deemed to be a part of the street, thus the city could qualify for immunity if they were able to prove the elements of the immunity statute.
In Iowa, a city must have notice and an opportunity to remove the hazard, in this case ice and snow. Historically, this has been a question for the jury, because of the fact-based nature of these situations. A city may be found to have constructive notice of the street’s condition if a sufficient time period has passed. The court sent the case back to the jury on the notice question. Kirkwood v. City of Cedar Rapids, No. 7-414/06-1950, 2007 Iowa App. LEXIS 1120 (Iowa Ct. App., Oct. 24, 2007).