Ruffin v. . Garrett

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Ruffin v. . Garrett

93 S.E. 449, 174 N.C. 134, 1917 N.C. LEXIS 42

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 26, 1917

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 93 S.E. 449 (Ruffin v. . Garrett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ruffin v. . Garrett, 93 S.E. 449, 174 N.C. 134, 1917 N.C. LEXIS 42 (N.C. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Brown, J.

The complaint alleges that defendants are supervisors of the public roads in Ahoskie Township, Hertford County; that is was their duty to keep in proper repair and in a reasonably safe condition the roads and bridges of said township; that defendants negligently failed to do so; that in consequence of such negligence plaintiff’s automobile was badly damaged in crossing an unsafe bridge in bad condition.

The ground of the demurrer is that the complaint fails to allege that the negligence of defendants was either corrupt or malicious. The demurrer was properly sustained.

This subject is fully discussed and the authorities reviewed by Justice ■ Holce in the recent case of Hipp v. Ferrall, 91 S. E., 831, and further discussion is unnecessary.

Affirmed.

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