Legal Opinion

Wrape v. North Carolina State Highway Commission

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 15, 1965No. 533PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggiNS, J.

The parties stipulated the construction work on Highway #49 was completed in accordance with the plans and specifications of the Highway Commission and pursuant to its contract. A tort claim, therefore, must be based on faulty plans or faulty specifications. Consequently, a showing of negligence on the part of a designated highway agent in making the plans or in preparing the specifications, is necessary before an award may be made against the State Highway Commission. The Tort Claims Act (G.S. 143-297) provides: “That the claim must contain . . .(2) the name of the department, institution,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Floyd v. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Eller v. Board of Education of Buncombe CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  3. Flynn v. North Carolina State Highway & Public Works CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ayscue v. N. C. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  2. Zimmer v. North Carolina Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. Myers v. McGradySupreme Court of North Carolina · 2006
  4. Brooks v. University of North CarolinaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API