Derrick v. City of Columbia

114 S.E. 857, 114 S.E. 837, 122 S.C. 29, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 233
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedDecember 16, 1922
Docket11064
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 114 S.E. 857 (Derrick v. City of Columbia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Derrick v. City of Columbia, 114 S.E. 857, 114 S.E. 837, 122 S.C. 29, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 233 (S.C. 1922).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Ci-iiee Justice Gary.

This is an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The complaint, the demurrer, the order overruling the demurrer, and the exceptions will be reported.

Section 2939 of the Civil Code of Daws 1912, is as follows :

“Establishment of Slaughter Pens: — Municipal corporations in this State containing five thousand inhabitants or more, may establish, or permit, or require the establishment of slaughter pens without and beyond their corporate limits, and may prescribe regulations for the establishment, maintenance and conduct of the same, and shall have the right to enforce all such regulations as if the same were estab *35 lished and conducted within the corporate limits. The police jurisdiction of any municipality that may establish, or permit the establishment of, a slaughter pen, or slaughter pens, shall extend to and cover the same, and all land and property necessarily used in connection therewith, not exceeding five acres, for the purpose of protecting and preserving the health in the inspection and slaughtering of animals for food, and in the protection and use of any such slaughter pen and grounds and- of the property therein or thereon, and in the transportation of meats from pens to such city, and in preserving peace and order at said pens and on said grounds.”

The allegations of the complaint that “the cause of such emission of offensive odors and gases from the said slaughterhouse is due to the construction of the plant, in that no adequate provision is made to prevent the noxious odors corrupting the atmosphere,” in effect charge negligence on the part of the defendant.

Conceding that the defendant had the authority, under Section 2939 of the Code of Taws 1912, to construct and maintain the plant, it was liable for such damages as were proximately caused by the negligent operation of the plant.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Kline v. City of Columbia
155 S.E.2d 597 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1967)
Collins v. CITY OF GREENVILLE, SC
105 S.E.2d 704 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1958)
Gasque v. Town of Conway
8 S.E.2d 871 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1940)
Sherbert v. School Dist. 85, Spartanburg Co.
168 S.E. 391 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1933)
Taylor v. Lexington Water Power Co.
163 S.E. 137 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1932)
Chewning v. Clarendon County
161 S.E. 777 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1931)
Chick Springs Water Co. v. State Highway Department
157 S.E. 842 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1931)
Randal v. State Highway Department
148 S.E. 57 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1929)
Caldwell v. Carroll
137 S.E. 444 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1927)
Wilson v. City of Laurens
132 S.E. 590 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1926)
Kneece v. City of Columbia
123 S.E. 100 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 S.E. 857, 114 S.E. 837, 122 S.C. 29, 1922 S.C. LEXIS 233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/derrick-v-city-of-columbia-sc-1922.