Crenshaw County v. Sikes

• Decision Date: 06 January 1897
• Citation: 113 Ala. 626,21 So. 135
• Parties: CRENSHAW COUNTY v. SIKES ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

21 So. 135

113 Ala. 626

CRENSHAW COUNTY v. SIKES ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 6, 1897

Appeal from circuit court, Crenshaw county; John R. Tyson, Judge.

Action by E. B. Sikes & Co. against Crenshaw county. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

On the 25th day of June, 1895, appellees sued appellant in the circuit court of Crenshaw county, claiming $125 as damages for injuries to a horse of plaintiffs, which resulted in the death of the horse. The complaint alleged that the injury occurred on the 18th day of May, 1894, and that it was caused by a defect in "the Harrell's bridge, a public bridge situated on the public road in Crenshaw county Alabama." The complaint also averred that said bridge was erected by a contract with the court of county commissioners and by an order of said court, and that they were authorized by law to make such order and contract; that said court of county commissioners failed to take guaranty by bond or otherwise from the builders of the bridge under their contract, that it should continue safe for the passage of travelers and other persons for a period of years; that the bridge was allowed to become defective and unsafe for travel on account of defective and decayed planks in its floor and that it remained in an unsafe condition until the 18th of May, 1894, when the plaintiff's horse, while being driven to a buggy across the bridge, stepped into a hole on the floor of the bridge caused by a decayed plank, or stepped on some decayed planks and partially fell through said bridge and was thereby so injured as to cause his death. The complaint also contained the following declaration "Plaintiffs further aver that said claim for damages was certified by affidavit and presented to the court of county commissioners of Crenshaw county. Alabama, within the time allowed by law and payment of the same was refused by said court of county commissioners before the bringing of this suit." The defendant demurred to the complaint upon the following grounds: (1) Said complaint fails to aver that defendant had notice of the alleged defect in the bridge by which it is claimed the horse of plaintiffs was injured. (2) Said complaint fails to aver that defendant had notice or was in possession of such information, which, if followed up would have caused the defendant to have knowledge of the defects in the bridge, on account of which it is claimed the horse of plaintiffs was injured. (3) Said complaint fails to sufficiently describe the defects in the bridge by which plaintiffs' horse was injured. These demurrers were overruled, and the defendant pleaded (1) the general issue (2) the statute of limitations of one year, and (3) contributory negligence. The evidence, as disclosed by the bill of exceptions, in reference to the presentation of the plaintiffs' claim to the commissioners' court of Crenshaw county is sufficiently stated in the opinion; and in view of the decision on the present appeal, it is unnecessary to set out the other evidence in the case. Among the other charges requested by the defendant, and to the refusal to give each of which the defendant separately excepted, was the following: "If the jury believe the evidence, it will find for the defendant." There were verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant appeals, and assigns as error the several rulings of the trial court to which exceptions were reserved.

Gamble, Powell & Rushton, for appellant.

I. H. Parks, for appellees.

HARALSON J.

The court of county commissioners is by statute declared a court of record, possessing "original jurisdiction in relation to the establishment, change or discontinuance of roads bridges, causeways and ferries within the county." Code, §§ 819, 825. The judge of probate, its principal judge, is the keeper of its records, and is required to record its proceedings. Code, § 827. It is provided by statute, that claims...