Smith v. N.C. Department of Correction
This text of Smith v. N.C. Department of Correction (Smith v. N.C. Department of Correction) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
2. Sgt. A. Miller reported to Scotland Correctional Institution investigators that when the books were confiscated, they were given to Officer P. Jacobs to be sent to Plaintiff's family home. Officer Jacobs subsequently reported to investigators that he never received any books.
3. There is no definitive list of the books in question; however, the Full Commission finds that Plaintiff has placed a value of the books at $466.80. The Full Commission further finds that Defendant has issued a check to Plaintiff's mother for the missing material in the amount of $9.79.
4. The Full Commission finds that there is sufficient evidence to show that Plaintiff's possessions were negligently handled by agents or employees of Defendant and that Plaintiff suffered a loss as a result. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to be reimbursed for his loss. The Full Commission finds that an amount of $450.00 is reasonable to reimburse Plaintiff.
2. Pursuant to the provisions of the Tort Claims Act, negligence is determined by the same rules applicable to private parties.Bolkhir v. N.C. State University,
3. In order to prevail in a tort claim filed pursuant to the Act, a plaintiff bears the burden of proving, as at common law: (1) that an officer, employee, involuntary servant or agent of the party-defendant owed the plaintiff a cognizable duty and (2) breached this duty, (3) proximately causing (4) injury to the plaintiff. Bolkhir v. N.C. State Univ.,
4. Plaintiff has shown by the greater weight of the evidence that Defendant was negligent in maintaining custody over the property removed from his cell on February 27, 2009. Defendant has failed to offer any evidence in contradiction to Plaintiff's allegations.
5. Plaintiff is entitled to reimbursement for the missing items.
2. No costs are taxed as Plaintiff was permitted to file this civil action in forma pauperis.
This the __ day of March 2011. *Page 4
S/___________________ PAMELA T. YOUNG CHAIR
CONCURRING:
*Page 1S/___________________ STACI T. MEYER COMMISSIONER
S/___________________ LINDA CHEATHAM COMMISSIONER
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Smith v. N.C. Department of Correction, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-nc-department-of-correction-ncworkcompcom-2011.