Hite v. Whitley County Court

• Decision Date: 27 January 1891
• Citation: 91 Ky. 168,15 S.W. 57
• Parties: HITE v. WHITLEY COUNTY COURT et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

15 S.W. 57

91 Ky. 168

HITE v. WHITLEY COUNTY COURT et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

January 27, 1891

Appeal from court of common pleas of Whitley.

Perkins & Harding, for appellant.

Hill &amp Denham, for appellees.

HOLT C.J.

The appellant, Mollie Hite, claiming that her eye-sight and health had been impaired by confinement in the Whitley county jail, brought this action against the Whitley county court and the jailer, J. L. Jones, to recover damages, upon the ground that the court had negligently failed to erect and keep in repair a good jail, and one supplied with proper heating apparatus, and that the jailer had neglected to keep the one which was provided comfortably warm and in proper condition otherwise. Without objection or exception from her she was ruled to elect whether she would proceed against the county court or the jailer; and she thereupon elected to prosecute the action against the county court, and it was dismissed as against the jailer without objection or exception by her. There is therefore no ground for an appeal as to him. A demurrer by the county court to the petition was sustained, and, the appellant failing to plead further, the action was dismissed. We will consider the action as being one against the county, inasmuch as it would have to satisfy a judgment, if one could be obtained against the county court. A court is merely an instrumentality for the administration of justice. No action can be maintained against a county court, as such, or a county, for an injury arising from mere neglect, or even from positive act, in the absence of a statute authorizing it. A county is not liable for an injury so arising, unless the liability is imposed by statute, either expressly or by necessary implication. It was so held in Dosdall v. County of Olmsted, 30 Minn 96, 14 N.W. 458, where the county was sued for the neglect of its officers in failing to repair a sidewalk appurtenant to the court-house. Also in Wehn v. Commissioners, 5 Neb. 494, where it was sought to make the county liable for the erection of a jail which was suffered to become a nuisance. Other cases may be found to the same effect, among which is that of Downing v. Mason Co., 87 Ky. 208, 8 S.W. 264, where a citizen sued the county for an injury to his premises, caused by their being flooded by the erection of a county jail. Both the county court and the county are parts of the machinery of the state government. ...