Morris v. Rockingham County

612 S.E.2d 660, 170 N.C. App. 417, 2005 N.C. App. LEXIS 997
CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina
DecidedMay 17, 2005
DocketCOA04-548
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 612 S.E.2d 660 (Morris v. Rockingham County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Morris v. Rockingham County, 612 S.E.2d 660, 170 N.C. App. 417, 2005 N.C. App. LEXIS 997 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

McGEE, Judge.

John Carter and John Murphy, paramedics for Rockingham County Emergency Medical Services, transported Charles Morris (plaintiff) by ambulance from Eden Morehead Hospital in *418 Rockingham County to North Carolina Baptist Hospital (Baptist Hospital) in Forsyth County. At Baptist Hospital, while the paramedics were removing the stretcher carrying plaintiff, the head of the stretcher bounced off a stair of the ambulance and hit the ground.

Plaintiff filed an action for negligence and medical malpractice in Forsyth County. Plaintiff named as defendants the two paramedics, Rockingham County, and Rockingham County Emergency Medical Services (collectively defendants). Specifically, plaintiff alleged that he suffered multiple cervical disc ruptures and required surgery as a result of the stretcher being dropped by defendant paramedics. Defendants filed a motion for change of venue to Rockingham County. In an order entered 29 January 2004, the trial court denied the motion. Defendants appeal.

Although defendants’ appeal is interlocutory, we have previously held that “a denial of a motion to transfer venue affects a substantial right.” Hyde v. Anderson, 158 N.C. App. 307, 309, 580 S.E.2d 424, 425 (citing Thompson v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 140 N.C. App. 115, 121-22, 535 S.E.2d 397, 401 (2000)), disc. review denied, 357 N.C. 459, 585 S.E.2d 759 (2003). The trial court’s order is immediately appealable and properly before us.

An action “[a]gainst a public officer or person especially appointed to execute his duties, for an act done by him by virtue of his office; or against a person who by his command or in his aid does anything touching the duties of such officer[,]” must be filed “in the county where the cause, or some part thereof, arose[.]” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-77 (2003). In considering such actions, the following two questions must be addressed: “(1) Is defendant a ‘public officer or person especially appointed to execute his duties’? [and] (2) In what county did the cause of action in suit arise?” Coats v. Hospital, 264 N.C. 332, 333, 141 S.E.2d 490, 491 (1965). In the present case, plaintiff and defendants only dispute in which county the cause of action arose, and accordingly, in which county venue is proper.

Defendants argue that the proper venue in this case is Rockingham County. Defendants assert that because the action is against a county and its public officers for the performance of an official duty, the action is local in nature, and the proper venue is the county in which the public officials perform their official duties. See Powell v. Housing Authority, 251 N.C. 812, 816, 112 S.E.2d 386, 389 (1960) (“[A]ll public officers, when sued about their official acts, should be sued in the county where they transact their official busi *419 ness.”). Defendants emphasize that the purpose underlying N.C.G.S. § 1-77 “is to avoid requiring public officers to ‘forsake their civic duties and attend the courts of a distant forum.’ ” Wells v. Cumberland Cty. Hosp. Sys., Inc., 150 N.C. App. 584, 587, 564 S.E.2d 74, 76 (2002) (quoting Coats, 264 N.C. at 333, 141 S.E.2d at 491). Defendants contend the paramedics were acting in their official capacity as emergency medical technicians for Rockingham County Emergency Medical Services, which is a Rockingham County agency. Defendants thus argue that Rockingham County is the only proper venue because all of the parties are citizens or entities residing solely in Rockingham County.

However, in the cases cited by defendants, the cause of action arose and occurred within the county that was being sued. By contrast, in the present case, the cause of action arose not in the county being sued, but in Forsyth County. Our Supreme Court has held that venue is proper outside of the county sued when, as is the case here, the cause of action arose in another county. Murphy v. High Point, 218 N.C. 597, 12 S.E.2d 1 (1940). 1 In Murphy, landowners in Davidson County sued the City of High Point, a Guilford County municipality that was operating a sewage disposal plant in Davidson County. Id. at 598, 12 S.E.2d at 1. The landowners filed their action in Davidson County because the City of High Point was allowing raw sewage to pass into a Davidson County stream. Id. Defendants argue that Murphy is factually and legally distinguishable from the present case. First, defendants argue that rather than involving a personal injury, as in the present case, Murphy involved real property in Davidson County, and the venue was properly in the county where the land affected was situated. Second, defendants argue that in Murphy, venue was in Davidson County because the City of High Point had a significant presence in Davidson County, as it was operating the sewage disposal plant there. Whereas, in the present case, defendants argue that Rockingham County does not have any buildings or other significant connection to Forsyth County.

Defendants’ arguments, however, are not supported by our Supreme Court’s rationale in Murphy. The Court noted that an offi *420 cer’s acts are no longer confined to the county in which he is an officer and that official conduct of public officers are “not necessarily inherently local.” Murphy, 218 N.C. at 599, 12 S.E.2d at 2 (internal quotations omitted). The Court further stated:

When public utilities are constructed and maintained outside the corporate limits of a city such plant must be operated and controlled. The agents and officials of the city who operate these utilities are acting for and in behalf of the city. Their acts are the acts of the municipality. When their conduct in respect thereto gives rise to a cause of action the cause of action arises where the act is committed.

Id. at 600, 12 S.E.2d at 3. In the case before us, defendants were fulfilling their duty under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 147-517 (2003) that “[e]ach county shall ensure that emergency medical services are provided to its citizens” by transporting plaintiff to a hospital outside Rockingham County. The paramedics, as officers of Rockingham County, were carrying out official duties, and were acting on behalf of Rockingham County. The paramedics’ official duties brought them to Forsyth County, and their acts or omissions gave rise to a cause of action in Forsyth County.

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

Related

Wright v. Wood
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2024
Williams v. Woodmen Found.
792 S.E.2d 876 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2016)
Town of Maiden v. Lincoln County
680 S.E.2d 754 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
Ford v. Paddock
674 S.E.2d 689 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2009)
Frink v. Batten
646 S.E.2d 809 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
612 S.E.2d 660, 170 N.C. App. 417, 2005 N.C. App. LEXIS 997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-rockingham-county-ncctapp-2005.