Croom v. Town of Burgaw

129 S.E.2d 586, 259 N.C. 60, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 477
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided March 6, 1963·No. 174·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It has been uniformly held by this Court that a municipality while acting in its governmental capacity, pursuant to legislative authority conferred by its charter, or in discharging a duty imposed for the public benefit, such corporation is not liable for the torts of its officers, unless there is a statute which subjects it to liability therefor.

A police officer duly appointed by a municipality is not an agent or servant of the city or town in the sense that the doctrine of respondeat superior applies. A municipality is not liable in tort for the wrongful acts of its police officers committed in connection with the performance of their duties as such officers. McIlhenney v.. Wilmington, 127 N.C. 146, 37 S.E. 187, 50 L.R.A. 470; Parks v. Princeton, 217 N.C. 361, 8 S.E. 2d 217; Gentry v. Hot Springs, 227 N.C. 665, 44 S.E. 2d 85.

*62 The judgment of the court below is

Affirmed.

Moore, J. took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Croom v. Town of Burgaw, 129 S.E.2d 586, 259 N.C. 60, 1963 N.C. LEXIS 477 (N.C. 1963).

129 S.E.2d 586 (Croom v. Town of Burgaw) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cox v. Lamm
E.D. North Carolina, 2020
Coleman v. Cooper
366 S.E.2d 2 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1988)
Bryant v. Mullins
347 F. Supp. 1282 (W.D. Virginia, 1972)
Galligan v. Town of Chapel Hill
171 S.E.2d 427 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1970)