Hightower v. Greenville County, 19132
| Decision Date | 25 November 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 19132,19132 |
| Citation | 255 S.C. 192,177 S.E.2d 785 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Julie Louise HIGHTOWER, Respondent, v. GREENVILLE COUNTY, South Carolina, Appellant. |
E. P. Riley, Greenville, for appellant.
McDonald & Cox, Greenville, for respondent.
Greenville County appeals from a judgment recovered against it by the plaintiff for personal injuries sustained when the right front wheel of the automobile in which she was a passenger struck a hole in a blacktop road maintained by the county.
This action was brought under Section 33--921 of the 1962 Code which waives the county's immunity from suit in favor of one who has been injured 'through a defect or the negligent repair of a highway, * * * occasioned by the neglect or mismanagement of the county, * * * provided such person has not in any way brought about such injury or damage by his own act or negligently contributed thereto.'
There are two questions presented for determination by this court. The first question challenges the adequacy of the evidence to take the issue of the county's negligence to the jury.
We summarize the evidence in light of the settled rule that all conflicts in the evidence, and all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom, must be resolved in favor of the plaintiff.
On or about September 4, 1968 the office of the County Tax Coordinator received an application for the excavation of a sewer cut in the hard surfaced road at 105 Mayflower Street, maintained by the county. A permit growing out of the application was issued to Lamar Byars Plumbing. Within a few days thereafter the plumber cut the hardtop road from one side to approximately the center, a width of about 18 inches, and connected a residence sewer line to the main sewer line in the street. The cut was then filled in and tamped.
After the permit was issued by the office of the tax coordinator a copy was supplied to the County Supervisor, who is charged with repair and maintenance of Greenville County roads.
On February 27, 1969 the plaintiff was a passenger in a Nash Metropolitan being driven by her husband. While proceeding along Mayflower Street the right front wheel of the automobile fell into the sewer cut which had become sunken or concave. There was testimony that the sunken area was as much as 10 to 12 inches deep. The impact was of such force that the right front wheel was torn from the car and the plaintiff was thrown against the steering wheel, causing her injury. The county did not have actual notice of the defect at the time of the injury.
The evidence shows that Greenville County is divided into eight districts, with each district having approximately 300 miles of road and each district having a superintendent in charge of maintenance and repairs. The superintendent and other employees make routine checks periodically and make repairs as needed. The supervisor testified that cuts are filled and repaired sometimes as much as a year after being made. He said that these cuts are repaired, 'Normally, speaking, when the dirt is hard enough--a rule of thumb is, when the dirt is hard enough to drive a ten-penny nail in it, and you can't pull it out with your fingers, it's ready to patch.'
Although the county was notified in September that the excavation would be made, leaving soft, though tamped, dirt in the roadway, apparently nothing was done by the county to the cut until after the injury. It is common knowledge that repacked dirt will and does sink, and this is especially true where vehicular traffic passes over it regularly during all kinds of weather. The rapidity with which such an area packs and sinks depends upon the nature of the soil and the efficiency of the tamping as well as the extent of vehicular use and the weather conditions. Dirt can only become packed sufficiently hard to hold a ten-penny nail such that it cannot be pulled out with the fingers, when it sinks below the level of the roadway. The evidence is susceptible of the inference that between September and February this is what happened.
The excavation into which the automobile wheel fell either developed by reason of a gradual sinking, or was dug out by some external influence. The jury was warranted in concluding that the excavation area sank gradually and should have been discovered and repaired prior to February 27. It is inferable that the county was waiting for the sewer cut area to pack, and waited too long.
We have held that a county will not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Strother v. Lexington County Recreation Com'n
...indicated that the governmental entity had actual notice when there was specific notification of a defect. See Hightower v. Greenville Co., 255 S.C. 192, 177 S.E.2d 785 (1970) (finding no actual notice where county was not "specifically notified" of the defect until after the accident); Cam......
-
Staples v. Duell, 2756
...notice is notice that a reasonable person should know and carries a duty of reasonable care. See Hightower v. Greenville County, 255 S.C. 192, 195, 177 S.E.2d 785, 786 (1970) ("Where a defect or dangerous condition, not created by its act or that of its agents, has existed for such length o......