## Facts

- In 1986, residents near a highway requested that the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation construct a pedestrian bridge over the highway.
- The ministry did not build the requested pedestrian bridge.
- In 1997, Carlos Picado González attempted to cross the highway, was struck by a vehicle, and died.
- At the time of death, Picado González reportedly had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.337.
- Picado González’s widow, on behalf of his estate, filed a damages action against the State seeking pecuniary and moral damages, alleging the ministry’s failure to build the bridge contributed to the death.

## Issues

1. Whether the State may be held civilly liable for damages based on an alleged omission to construct pedestrian-safety infrastructure after prior community requests.
2. How the decedent’s severe intoxication affects causation and any allocation of responsibility in a suit against the State for an alleged infrastructure-related omission.
3. Whether the lower courts erred in denying recovery to the estate on the asserted theory of state responsibility.

## Decision

- The trial court denied recovery to the estate.
- The intermediate appellate court affirmed the trial court.
- The Supreme Court of Costa Rica issued a per curiam decision in Resolution No. 584 (2005), with a noted dissent by Justice León Feoli.
- The publicly available record does not disclose the Supreme Court’s disposition (e.g., affirmance, reversal, modification, or remand) or the rationale for the majority or dissent.

## Legal Principles

- The publicly available record does not provide the court’s stated rule of decision or doctrinal standards governing state liability for omissions in public-works or highway-safety contexts.
- Based on the claim’s theory and posture, the case necessarily implicated (at minimum) principles concerning governmental duty for public safety measures, omission-based liability, foreseeability/notice, causation, and victim fault; however, the court’s treatment of these matters is not available from the accessible material.

## Conclusion

The case involved an estate’s attempt to recover pecuniary and moral damages from the State for a fatal highway crossing allegedly linked to the government’s failure to construct a requested pedestrian bridge, but the accessible information is insufficient to state the Supreme Court’s holding or reasoning beyond the fact of its per curiam decision and a recorded dissent.


Estate of Picado González v. State, Res. No. 584, Exped. No. 97-000736-0163-CA (Costa Rica Sup. Ct. 2005)