Gibson v. Sioux Cnty.
| Decision Date | 24 June 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 31955.,31955. |
| Citation | 168 N.W. 80,183 Iowa 1006 |
| Parties | GIBSON v. SIOUX COUNTY ET AL. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Osceola County; Wm. Hutchinson, Judge.
Action for personal injuries sustained upon a highway by reason of obstructions negligently placed and permitted and left unguarded by the defendants as alleged. There was a demurrer to the petition which was sustained. Judgment being entered thereon, the plaintiff has appealed. Affirmed.G. A. Gibson, of Sheldon, and T. M. Zink, of Le Mars, for appellant.
O. H. Montzheimer and W. H. Downing, both of Primghar, Anthony Te Paske, of Sioux Center, Van Oosterhout & Kolyn, of Orange City, and T. E. Diamond, of Sheldon, for appellees.
The highway upon which the accident occurred was located upon the county line between Sioux county and O'Brien county. These two counties are defendants. Joined with them are the members of the respective boards of supervisors and their employé Gardner. The obstructions complained of consisted of sand and gravel which had been hauled upon the highway for the purpose of building a cement bridge or culvert.
The question presented is that of the liability of a county for damages by reason of such alleged negligence. The argument is that the highway was a county highway and in charge of the county supervisors of the respective counties, and that the counties were therefore liable for damages for negligence. The question is not an open one in this state. But appellant challenges the correctness of the prior holdings of the court on the question. The argument is essentially the same as that presented to us in Snethen v. Harrison County, 172 Iowa, 85, 152 N. W. 12. The question was quite fully gone into in that case, and our previous cases were reviewed therein. No useful purpose can be subserved by repeating the discussion. Sufficient to say that we adhere to the former precedents. Soper v. Henry County, 26 Iowa, 264;Kincaid v. Hardin County, 53 Iowa, 430, 5 N. W. 589, 36 Am. Rep. 236;Green v. Harrison County, 61 Iowa, 311, 16 N. W. 136;Nutt v. Mills County, 61 Iowa, 554, 16 N. W. 536;Lindley v. Polk County, 84 Iowa, 308, 50 N. W. 975;Dashner v. Mills County, 88 Iowa, 401, 55 N. W. 468;Packard v. Voltz, 94 Iowa, 277, 62 N. W. 757, 58 Am. St. Rep. 396;Miller v. Boone County, 95 Iowa, 5, 63 N. W. 352;Wenck v. Carroll County, 140 Iowa, 558, 118 N. W. 900.
If the rule of law which has been established by the precedents above cited, and which has been followed for so many years, ought to be changed, the appeal should be to the lawmaking body. The rule of nonliability of counties in actions of this nature has abundant authority in other jurisdictions, even though it be true that the authorities are not unanimous in that regard.
[1] II. It is argued by appellant that, even though the counties be not liable, yet the members of the respective boards of supervisors and their employé Gardner are liable, in that their duties were ministerial and were negligently performed. We have held to the contrary.
In Snethen v. Harrison County, supra, we said:
To continue reading
Request your trial