## Facts

- In December 2007, Juston Pohl traveled in rural Furnas County, Nebraska, at night during light snow after attending a basketball game.
- Pohl intended to drive west on Road 719 but mistakenly turned onto Drive 719, a different gravel road with a ninety-degree curve about one mile west of Highway 47.
- Drive 719 had no posted speed limit, but Nebraska’s general statutory speed limit of 50 mph applied.
- Pohl drove with high-beam headlights and testified he accelerated to about 63 mph on the unfamiliar gravel road.
- A yellow ninety-degree curve warning sign stood at least 110 feet before the curve; Pohl did not see it before leaving the roadway.
- Pohl’s traffic-engineering expert testified the sign was heavily scratched, lacked adequate retroreflectivity for nighttime visibility, and was placed too close to provide sufficient advance warning at lawful speeds.
- Pohl braked late, failed to negotiate the curve, left the road, struck an embankment, rolled, and came to rest upside down in a culvert.
- Pohl lost consciousness and remained in the vehicle overnight; he later obtained help and was diagnosed with a thoracic spine fracture with cord compression and frostbite, requiring surgery.
- After a bench trial in federal district court sitting in diversity, the court found the County and Pohl both negligent, allocated 60% fault to the County and 40% to Pohl, and entered a damages judgment reduced for comparative negligence.

## Issues

1. Whether the County breached its duty of reasonable care in the placement and maintenance of the curve warning sign on Drive 719.
2. Whether any negligence by the County in sign maintenance and placement was a proximate cause of the accident.
3. Whether Pohl’s speeding and driving conduct were a proximate cause of his injuries under Nebraska comparative negligence law.
4. Whether the district court clearly erred in apportioning fault 60% to the County and 40% to Pohl and in entering judgment based on that allocation.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment in full.
- The court upheld findings that the County breached its duty of reasonable care by maintaining a nonreflective warning sign and placing it too close to the curve.
- The court held the district court did not clearly err in finding the County’s breach was a proximate cause because a properly maintained and positioned sign could have provided earlier warning and time to slow.
- The court also upheld the finding that Pohl was negligent and that his negligence was a concurrent proximate cause, based on driving about 63 mph on an unfamiliar gravel road at night in light snow.
- Applying clear-error review to fact findings and fault allocation after a bench trial, the court affirmed the 60/40 comparative-fault apportionment and the resulting reduced damages award.

## Legal Principles

- Under Nebraska law, counties have a duty to exercise reasonable care in the placement and maintenance of traffic control devices on county roads.
- Evidence that warning signage lacks adequate retroreflectivity and is placed too close to a hazard can support a finding of breach of reasonable care; traffic-engineering standards are probative of reasonableness.
- Proximate cause may be found where a deficient warning sign reduces visibility and advance notice such that a reasonable driver would have had less time to react and slow, contributing to the accident.
- A plaintiff’s speeding and inattentive driving can constitute contributory negligence and a concurrent proximate cause without necessarily superseding a public entity’s negligence.
- In a federal diversity bench trial, findings on negligence, causation, and comparative-fault apportionment are reviewed for clear error, with deference to the trial court’s weighing of evidence and credibility.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit affirmed a bench-trial judgment holding a county primarily at fault for an accident caused in part by a poorly maintained and inadequately placed curve warning sign, while also affirming that the driver’s excessive speed on an unfamiliar gravel road was concurrent negligence warranting a 40% reduction of damages under Nebraska comparative fault.


Pohl v. County of Furnas, 682 F.3d 745 (8th Cir. 2012)