Berrien County v. Vickers, 31266.

• Court: United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
• Citation: 38 S.E.2d 619,73 Ga.App. 863
• Docket Number: 31266.
• Parties: BERRIEN COUNTY v. VICKERS.
• Decision Date: 06 June 1946

38 S.E.2d 619

73 Ga.App. 863

BERRIEN COUNTY
v.
VICKERS.

No. 31266.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

June 6, 1946

Syllabus by the Court

1. While a county is not liable to suit unless made so by statute, it has been provided by a statute of this State, that a county is primarily liable for all injuries caused by reason of any defective bridges, whether erected by contractors or county authorities; and the term 'bridge,' as used in said statute, includes all the appurtenances necessary to its proper use, and embraces its abutments and approaches.

2. Where the county or state highway department negligently leaves road machinery on the abutment or approach to a bridge, so as to render it dangerous for automobiles to travel thereon and which causes injuries to a person undertaking to cross the bridge in an automobile, such dangerous condition in the bridge is a defect in the bridge, within the meaning of the statute which makes a county liable for injuries caused by a defective bridge.

[73 Ga.App. 864] (a) A suit may be maintained against a county and a verdict and judgment obtained against it for damages resulting from a defect in a bridge, although it may appear that jurisdiction over the highway on which the bridge was located had been assumed by [38 S.E.2d 620] the highway department under terms of law, and that the highway department, and not the county, was guilty of the negligence in the maintenance and construction of the bridge or its approaches which caused the injury; for, in contemplation of the law, the negligence charged against the highway department is the negligence of the county.

3. The concrete structure described in the plaintiff's petition, erected over a creek so as to make a continuous roadway and to afford to travelers a convenient passageway from one bank of the creek to the other, is a bridge, within the meaning of the Code, § 95-1001, which makes a county primarily liable for injuries caused by reason of any defective bridges.

4. The fact, that the bridge over the creek on the highway had 12 inches of dirt and asphalt paving on top of its concrete floor, did not constitute the structure a culvert, instead of a bridge.

5. The petition set out a cause of action and the trial judge did not err in overruling the demurrer thereto.

John S. Vickers sued Berrien County for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained on the approach to a bridge across Thigpen creek or branch on State Route No. 125, between Valdosta and Ray City, Georgia. It is alleged that the accident occurred on the night of August 25, 1945, at about 10 o'clock p. m., while the plaintiff was riding on the front seat of an automobile that was being driven by R. A. Passmore, Jr., in a northerly direction along said highway at a rate of speed of approximately 40 miles per hour, and that as the said R. A. Passmore approached the north end of said bridge he struck a cut-away harrow which was upon and on the east side of the roadway of such highway and extending on said structure approximately two feet from the north edge thereof, and after hitting and passing over said harrow and about 10 feet further north on the roadway on said approach to the bridge the automobile struck a rubber tire packer, consisting of five rubber tires on the rear and two rubber tires in the front, the same being a triangular shaped object, and by the impact of the collision the automobile was almost completely demolished and the plaintiff was severely injured as alleged in the petition; that the collision and injuries thereby inflicted on the plaintiff occurred on a dark night, the driver of the automobile being unable to see [73 Ga.App. 865] the said machinery that had been negligently left on said bridge and the approach thereto by the State Highway Department, acting by and through its employees, without any notice or warning signs to indicate that said highway was being repaired or of the presence of said machinery thereon, although said highway was then being used by the public in driving cars over the same; and that said bridge was thereby rendered defective on said occasion.

The description of the concrete structure as set out in detail in the petition is as follows: 'The overall span of the structure (measured lengthwise along said highway) is approximately 28 feet and 6 inches. The overall width of the structure is approximately 37 feet and 8 inches. The height of the structure from the contiguous ground to the top thereof is approximately 9 feet. The clear height of the opening under the structure from the bottom of the floor thereof to the bottom (in the ground) of the structure is approximately 7 feet. This structure is divided into three sections between the north abutment and the south abutment. Beginning at the south abutment there is one section approximately 8 feet wide; farther north there is another section approximately [38 S.E.2d 621] 8 feet wide; and still farther north there is another section approximately 8 feet wide. There are between the...