Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hurd v. Williamsburg County

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided March 28, 2005No. 25959Published

1Dissent

*430Chief Justice TOAL.

I respectfully dissent. In my opinion, the Transit Authority exercised reasonable care in dropping off its passenger. Therefore, I would reverse the court of appeals’ decision holding that the Transit Authority breached its duty of care to Hurd.

I disagree with the majority because, in my opinion, the majority holds the Transit Authority to a higher duty of care than what is required of common carriers. A common carrier is required to allow a passenger to exit the bus in a reasonably safe place. Flynn v. Carolina Scenic Stages, 237 S.C. 340, 345, 117 S.E.2d 364, 366-367…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Blye v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  2. Blye v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Burton v. Des Moines Metropolitan Transit AuthoritySupreme Court of Iowa · 1995
  4. Connolly v. RogersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  5. In re CrescenziNew York Court of Appeals · 1988

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API