Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 160.16 (2026)

Warning Signs And Detour Signs

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Contract to provide for warning signs.

Whenever the road authorities enter into a contract for the construction or improvement of any road, culvert, or bridge thereon they shall, as a condition of the contract, provide therein that the contractor shall place suitable warning signs at the highways intersecting the road so to be constructed or improved warning the public that the road under construction or improvement is impassable at a designated place or distance from the warning sign. The signs shall be placed at such places as will obviate unnecessary travel by persons not otherwise aware of the impassable condition of the roads. Nothing in the provisions of chapters 160 to 165 shall make any town, county, or the state liable in damages for the failure of the road authorities to provide in any contract for the erection of a warning sign as is herein provided for, or the failure of any contractor to erect same in accordance herewith.

Subd. 2.Contractor to place detour signs.

The contractor, lead supervisor, or person in charge of work or repairs on any public road shall, when the doing of the work or repairs necessitates the closing of a part of the road to traffic, post signs stating that the road is under repair and describing the direction and distance of the detour necessary to avoid the part of the road being repaired. The signs shall be posted at the intersection of the road under repair with the road to be traveled while detouring and at appropriate intervals along the road.

Subd. 3.Barricades.

The road authorities may also provide, by contract or otherwise, for the erection of barricades, fences or other obstructions so as to prevent traffic from entering any impassable section of road or a section closed to public travel.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1944–1974 · leading case: Poppenhagen v. Sornsin Constr. Co., 220 N.W.2d 281 (Minn. 1974).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Poppenhagen v. Sornsin Constr. Co., 220 N.W.2d 281 (Minn. 1974). · cites it 2× “2, 6 and that unless it could be shown that the terms of the contract specifically required the contractor to erect signs according to the specifications of the manual, the provisions of § 160.16, subd. 2, would control. The trial court said that there was no language in the…”

Underwood v. Town Bd. of Empire, 14 N.W.2d 459 (Minn. 1944). · cites it 2× “It is also contended that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury to determine the money benefits conferred by the vacation, to deduct them from the damages, and to award the difference, if any, as damages, contrary to the provisions of § 160.16, subd. 4 (§ 2588, subd.…”

Dornack v. Barton Constr. Co., 137 N.W.2d 536 (Minn. 1965). “” The word “barricade” as used in § 160.16 must have been intended to convey a different meaning than the words “warning sign.”

Erschens Ex Rel. Erschens v. Cnty. of Lincoln, 177 N.W.2d 28 (Minn. 1970). · cites it 3× “Plaintiffs also contend that defendant county was required by § 160.16, subd. 2, to post signs warning that the road was closed and describing the direction and length of the detour, and that failure to do so was negligence.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.