The New Jersey Department of Transportation is immune from claims stemming from the death of a woman struck and killed in a hit-and-run while crossing U.S. Route 206 in Frankford Township, a state appeals court has ruled.

A three-judge Appellate Division panel, in dismissing the case brought on behalf of Cary Mattos, relied on a recent Supreme Court decision fine-tuning the Tort Claims Act, Lee v. Brown, a case involving a fatal 2010 apartment fire in Paterson.

In Mattos v. Pvt. Peter S. Hotalen- American Legion Post, an unpublished decision issued Aug. 22, Appellate Division Judges Jose Fuentes, Thomas Manahan and Karen Suter said a Sussex County trial judge erred in failing to dismiss the DOT on summary judgment based on unsettled issues of material fact.

The panel quoted the language of the TCA: “A public entity is not liable for any injury caused by adopting or failing to adopt a law or by failing to enforce any laws.”

The accident occurred on March 25, 2014. Daniel Mattos and his wife, Cary, were attending a St. Patrick's Day party at the Pvt. Hotalen American Legion Post 157 on Route 206 in Frankford. The couple parked on a DOT-owned grassy field on the opposite side of Route 206 from the hall.

The DOT property was routinely used for overflow parking by people frequenting the legion post, the court said.

The couple left the legion post at about 10:30 p.m. and, as they were crossing Route 206, Cary Mattos was struck by a car driven by defendant Thomas Zoschak. She died at the scene. Zoschak fled without stopping, but surrendered to the state police two days later, and ultimately pleaded guilty to a hit-and-run, according to reports.

Route 206, at the point where the Mattoses crossed, is a two-lane road with a speed limit of 50 miles per hour, and there is no crosswalk, the court noted.

The estate's suit alleged that the DOT created a dangerous condition by failing to take safety measures to ensure pedestrian safety at that spot.

The DOT responded that using the lot for parking was illegal, although there were no signs alerting drivers that parking was not allowed on the property, the appeals court said.

The appeals court cited last February's Supreme Court ruling in Lee, a civil case lodged over the Paterson apartment fire that killed four people. In that case, two lower courts had ruled that the city fire inspector, Robert Bierals, should be awarded qualified immunity only, which meant the city could have been held at least partially liable in the lawsuits, filed in response to the deaths, other injuries and surround property damage. Those lower courts said claims that Bierals failed to properly prosecute the owner of the property could not be dismissed on summary judgment. But the Supreme Court reversed. “The [Tort Claims Act] grants absolute immunity from liability to public entities and their employees for injuries resulting from a failure to enforce the law,” Justice Faustino Fernandez-Vina said in the 5-0 ruling.

The Appellate Division in Mattos said there was no question that the DOT was immune.

“Plaintiffs' cause of action against the DOT would have modicum of substantive merit if Cary's death was proximately caused by a dangerous condition located on the property itself,” the judges said in the per curiam ruling. “The circumstances in Lee were far more compelling.”