Cameron v. State of California (1972) involved a dangerous highway curve. The trial court determined that the state was immune under section 830.6 and granted a directed verdict. (Cameron v. State of California, supra, 7 Cal. 3d at p. 322) On appeal, the Supreme Court considered whether the state had established the elements of design immunity "as a matter of law" (Id. at pp. 324-325), as would be necessary to support a directed verdict (Dailey v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (1970) 2 Cal. 3d 741, 745, 87 Cal. Rptr. 376, 470 P.2d 360) It concluded that the state had produced no evidence to show that the dangerous feature of the curve as constructed was part of the approved design. (Cameron v. State of California, supra, 7 Cal. 3d at p. 326.) Significantly, the court did not hold or even suggest that the elements of design immunity are issues of law for the court to decide apart from the particular requirements of a directed verdict.