Section 9.14 First Element: Property Was in Dangerous Condition at Time of Injury

• Library: Local Government Deskbook (2017 Ed.)

1. (§9.14) First Element: Property Was in Dangerous Condition at Time of Injury

Early cases construing “dangerous condition” stated that the term referred to a physical defect of the property. Twente v. Ellis Fischel State Cancer Hosp., 665 S.W.2d 2 (Mo. App. W.D. 1983) (rejecting the theory that an unguarded parking lot where the plaintiff was raped was a dangerous condition); Kanagawa v. State by and Through Freeman, 685 S.W.2d 831 (Mo. banc 1985) (rejecting the theory that an inadequate prison fence and gate were dangerous conditions that allowed the prisoner to escape and kidnap, assault, and rape the plaintiff).

The courts soon broadened their view of “dangerous condition” to include “physical deficienc[ies]” such as debris on the ground that was flung from a lawn mower, Jones v. St. Louis Hous. Auth., 726 S.W.2d 766 (Mo. App. E.D. 1987), and a folding room partition placed at the foot of a ladder, Alexander v. State, 756 S.W.2d 539 (Mo. banc 1988).

In Alexander, 756 S.W.2d 539, the Court acknowledged that there was no intrinsic defect in the property, a folding partition placed by a ladder. Rather, the dangerous condition was created by “the positioning of various items of...