All v. County of Barnwell
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Fraser, J., Barnwell, The appeal was from the following order sustaining a demurrer: The defendant had filed an answer containing a general denial of the allegations in the complaint, but submitted an oral demurrer that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The case was heard on this demurrer.
Read the full summary
Before Fraser, J., Barnwell, The appeal was from the following order sustaining a demurrer: The defendant had filed an answer containing a general denial of the allegations in the complaint, but submitted an oral demurrer that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The case was heard on this demurrer. The complaint alleges that there was in said county, on a “public road” leading from Blackville to Barnwell, “a deep and dangerous hole or trench” which remained open and unrepaired for about three weeks; that the deceased, J. A. All, while travelling on…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Chiee Justice Simpson.
The single question in this case is, whether an action for damages will lie against a county in this State, under section 2183, General Statutes, by the administrator of a. deceased party, who lost his life through a defect in a bridge under the control of the county commissioners, negligence being alleged in the complaint.
It is conceded that previous to the act of 1874, now section 1087, General Statutes, no such action could be maintained against a county, in fact no action for damages, for negligence, or otherwise, alleged…
2Cited by5 opinions
- McCall v. BatsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
- United States Casualty Co. v. State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1930
- McCall ex rel. Andrews v. BatsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1985
- McLendon v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1915
- Randal v. State Highway DepartmentSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1929