Driver's Family Sues Google Over Washed-out Bridge

I saw this one. "was returning home from his daughter’s ninth birthday before the accident" You knew it was there? Hmm?
Not googles fault. Why wouldn't the city barricade or fix the bridge, they had 9 years? Sounds fishy to me. I'd hate to think the guy did it on purpose

I think the member who actually lives there is JanJ. He said that the road and bridge is privately owned. This happened because the developer who built the houses in the area never made arrangements to transfer the common areas like roads to the town or county.

When the bridge washed out 10 years ago, the county placed barriers there anyway, but someone removed them to steal the lumber. Then, nothing was ever done after that.

Honest, your Honor I was blindly following Google's directions and map, I can't be held responsible for looking out the window too. I needed money for free, please help me sue the big guys.

I’ve added the bold format to the original quote. Having said that there are several sources online that state the property, road and bridge are pricately owned. One of those sources also quotes state police as I recall.

Similar events always amaze me; a few weeks back someone using his Tesla in auto-navigate mode hit deep standing water at about 60 mph. The vehicle hydroplaned and some resulting damage essentially destroyed the car.

Whether the bridge/road is privately owned is beside the point. Google still routed the guy down there. What's more salient is whether or not the county owns the bridge/road. If the county has responsibility for them, then they should fix them or barricade the road. What I don't know is how Google finds out about situations like this so they remove that road from their routing algorithm.
As for the driver, some people, when something so unthinkable happens, automatically blame the driver. With the known facts I'm inclined to accept them instead of blaming the driver.

Phil

JanJ's post about the bridge:

http://www.poi-factory.com/node/51063

Page down a long way to read JanJ's post. He says the owner blew up the bridge to prevent anyone from using it.

(Sounds like the Hatfields and the McCoys )

Then the developer had to build a new bridge at another location to provide two access roads to the development, but left the destroyed bridge and its roads in place, creating a trap.

JanJ has made other posts about this, but I can't find them.

https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/local/catawba-county-nc-br...

The family is not only suing Google, but also the private landowners and others responsible for creating or maintaining the hazardous condition.

'Multiple complaints were made': Family sues Google after father drives off bridge

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2023/09/23/google-lawsuit-fami...

Some people blame everyone other than themselves for what happens to them or what they do. Sometimes even throwing common sense out the window people want someone else to be responsible for what happens.

In cases like this, I understand the plaintiffs sue everybody for everything. And none of us here really know the full story of what happened that dark and rainy night. Got it. But what I wonder is that if the road and bridge were in fact privately owned, why the owner(s) should be liable if someone drives onto their private property and into their private lake. And this is what else I wonder: In a case like this, who, besides Google, is responsible. Is it the county? Why, it's private property. I finally I wonder how Google and Here and other mapping providers get there information. Does anyone here know for a fact and not merely speculating?

Phil

I am not a lawyer but here is my opinion:

According to JanJ, the bridge was used by people who lived nearby, even though it was privately owned. The land owner and the developer had a dispute and the land owner blew the bridge up. It is his bridge - he can blow it up. The bridge was in good condition before that. The landowner took no action to barricade the bridge or the roads leading to it. In doing so he created a trap that could injure or kill people. Over the years people did drive off the bridge into the creek and were injured, but the landowner did nothing. Then, someone was killed.