George County v. Bufkin

• Citation: 117 Miss. 844,78 So. 781
• Decision Date: 03 June 1918
• Docket Number: 20220
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: GEORGE COUNTY v. BUFKIN

78 So. 781

117 Miss. 844

GEORGE COUNTY v. BUFKIN

No. 20220

Supreme Court of Mississippi

June 3, 1918

Division B

APPEAL from the circuit court of George county, HON. J. H. NEVILLE Judge.

Suit by E. M. Bufkin against George County. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

Reversed and dismissed.

O. F Moss, for appellant.

Sam. Whitman, Jr., for appellee.

OPINION

ETHRIDGE, J.

E. M. Bufkin was the owner of a colt in George county, and carried the colt to a dipping vat in said county to be dipped, and in the process of dipping the colt slipped and fell, and injured itself in such manner that it died during the day. Bufkin presented a claim for sixty dollars to the board of supervisors of George county in the spring of 1917. The board heard and allowed the claim to the amount of forty dollars. There was no appeal undertaken, and under the law as it then existed none would lie, because the amount of allowance under the law in force at that time was entirely discretionary with the board. Bufkin, however, some months after the account was allowed by the board of supervisors as above stated, filed a suit in the justice of the peace court for sixty dollars; said suit being instituted about the 17th day of August, 1917. The justice of the peace rendered judgment against the county for sixty dollars, and the county appealed to the circuit court of George county. The circuit court, to which this cause was returnable, held a special term, called for the fifth Monday of October, 1917. When the case came on for trial in the circuit court, the plaintiff introduced evidence of the value of the colt, showing it to be worth the sum of sixty dollars. It also appeared in Bufkin's evidence that he was assisting in the dipping of the colt at the time it was injured, and that he had previously been given permission to use other methods of eradicating ticks from this particular colt. The county introduced no evidence, insisting that there was no liability, and both the county and the plaintiff requested peremptory instructions. The circuit court gave a peremptory instruction for the plaintiff, and judgment was entered for sixty dollars. From this judgment the county appeals here.

We held in the case of Horton v. Lincoln County, 77 So. 796, that there was no liability against the county for injuries to stock in dipping, but that the act then in force (prior to the enactment of chapter 38 of the Laws of the Special Session of 1917), being chapter 222 of the Laws of 1914 (section 3806 and section 3807 of Hemingway's Code) that such statute was a mere enabling statute, empowering the board of supervisors in their discretion to make an allowance for injuries in such sum as in their judgment was right and proper under the...