Horne v. Beason

Decision Date24 April 1985
Docket NumberNo. 22335,22335
CitationHorne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 (S.C. 1985)
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesRobert S. HORNE, Administrator of the Estate of Wayne Franklin Horne, deceased, Respondent-Appellant, v. James BEASON, Joe Moon, Darrell Kimbrell, Ken Holloway, Don N. Smith, Wayne Welborn, Randall G. Ponder, Paul Greer, Roy Collins, Jr., L.C. Pearson, Nancy Jones, and the City of Greer, Defendants, Of Whom The City of Greer is Appellant, And James Beason and Joe Moon are Appellants-Respondents, And Don N. Smith, Wayne Welborn, Randall G. Ponder, Paul Greer, Roy Collins, Jr., L.C. Pearson and Nancy Jones are Respondents. Appeal of The CITY OF GREER. . Heard

Jeffrey A. Merriam of Carter, Smith, Merriam & Rogers, Greer, for appellant.

W. Howard Boyd, Jr. of Rainey, Britton, Gibbs & Clarkson, Greenville, for appellants-respondents and respondents.

Thomas W. Greene and Jerry L. Taylor, Greenville, for respondent-appellant.

LITTLEJOHN, Chief Justice:

Wayne Franklin Horne, a seventeen-year-old boy, was discovered dead in his cell at the City of Greer Jail. There is no contention that he died at the hands of another, and the agreed statement of fact by which the parties are bound stipulates that "... he was found dead in his cell, having hanged himself."

These wrongful death and survival actions were instituted against several defendants by the plaintiff-respondent-appellant, Robert S. Horne, in his capacity as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased. Identity of the various defendants is necessary to an understanding of the issues involved in this appeal.

The City of Greer is a municipality; Don N. Smith is Mayor and Welborn, Ponder, Greer, Collins, Pearson and Jones are members of City Council; Beason was Chief of Police and Moon was shift supervisor of the jail; Kimbrell and Holloway are members of the South Carolina Highway Patrol who arrested the youth and delivered him to the jail for incarceration. The complaint alleges all of these defendants were negligent and proximately caused the death of Horne and that the plaintiff is entitled to recovery of both actual and punitive damages.

The facts are not greatly, if at all, in dispute. Wayne Franklin Horne was arrested by Patrolmen Kimbrell and Holloway on the night of August 19, 1982, while driving a motor vehicle and dressed in swimming trunks and a bathrobe with a cloth belt. He was charged with driving under license suspension, second offense, and with operating an uninsured motor vehicle all in violation of statutory law. They took him to the Greer City Jail where he was incarcerated as the sole occupant of a cell at approximately 10:25 p.m. Some thirty-five minutes later, he was found dead in the cell having hanged himself from overhead bars with the cloth bathrobe belt he was wearing when arrested.

Patrolmen Kimbrell and Holloway answered the complaints denying allegations of negligence and moved for summary judgment. All other defendants demurred asserting (1) that sovereign immunity was applicable, (2) the complaint failed to state a cause of action, and (3) the death was a suicide and all were not subject to liability as a matter of law. The trial judge granted summary judgment in favor of the arresting patrolmen; he denied the demurrers of Moon and Beason and of the City of Greer; he sua sponte dismissed the action as related to the Mayor and Councilmen.

Moon, Beason and the City appeal submitting that the trial judge erred in denying their demurrers. Plaintiff appeals arguing that the trial judge erred in granting summary judgment to the two patrolmen and in dismissing the Mayor and City Council sua sponte.

As relates to the cause of action against the City of Greer, there has recently been filed in this Court an opinion in the case of McCall v. Batson, 329 S.E.2d 741, S.C. 1985, in which the doctrine of sovereign immunity has been eroded. That opinion held that governmental entities, such as the City of Greer, are immune from suit until July 1, 1986, unless they have liability insurance. All parties stipulate that at the time this cause of action arose, the City of Greer did not have liability insurance coverage. Accordingly without further discussion of the merits of the case, the City of Greer prevails on this appeal and we reverse the denial of the demurrer as to the defendant based on McCall.

In light of the view we take, it is not necessary to separately discuss the charges of culpability against (1) the Mayor and City Council, (2) the Highway Patrolmen and (3) the chief of police and supervising jailor. No...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
17 cases
  • Vinson v. Hartley
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • October 14, 1996
    ...breach of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the duty is owed. Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 (1985). The damages allegedly sustained must be shown to have been proximately caused, i.e. causally connected, to the breach ......
  • Juaire v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • February 16, 2012
    ...breach of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the duty is owed. Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 (1985). 10. A violation of applicable motorists' statutes is negligence per se. Field v. Gregory, 230 S.C. 39, 94 S.E.2d 15 (1......
  • Jackson v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • April 12, 2018
    ...breach of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the duty is owed." Horne v. Beason, 331 S.E.2d 342, 344 (S.C. 1985).16. "Negligence is not actionable unless it is a proximate cause of the injury. Proximate cause requires proof of both cau......
  • Roberson v. U.S.A
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Carolina
    • November 22, 2010
    ...of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the duty is owed. Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 521, 331 S.E. 2d 342, 344 (1985).9. A violation of § 56-5-3810 constitutes negligence per se. See Chesser, 232 S.C. at 52, 100 S.E.2d at 543; Green,......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • B. Causation
    • United States
    • The South Carolina Law of Torts (SCBar) Chapter 2 Negligence and Similar Breaches of Duty
    • Invalid date
    ...and accompanying text. [722] See, e.g., Koester v. Carolina Rental Ctr., Inc., 313 S.C. 490, 443 S.E.2d 392 (1994); Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 (1985); Hill v. York Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 313 S.C. 303, 437 S.E.2d 179 (Ct. App. 1993); supra notes 693-702; PROSSER § 45, at 3......
  • A. Duty and Breach of Duty
    • United States
    • The South Carolina Law of Torts (SCBar) Chapter 2 Negligence and Similar Breaches of Duty
    • Invalid date
    ...PROSSER § 31, at 169-71.[13] See, e.g., Hayes v. Peoples Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 289 S.C. 63, 344 S.E.2d 624 (1986); Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 (1985); Foreman v. Atl. Land Corp., 271 S.C. 130, 245 S.E.2d 609 (1978); Young v. Tide Craft, Inc., 270 S.C. 453, 242 S.E.2d 671......
  • Vol. 11, No. 1, Pg. 38. Comparing First Collision Fault with Second Collision Defect.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Bar Journal No. 1999, January 1999
    • January 1, 1999
    ...A breach of duty exists when it is foreseeable that one's conduct may likely injure the person to whom the duty is owed. Horne v. Beason, 285 S.C. 518, 331 S.E.2d 342 Unlike a strict liability action where the product itself is at issue, the focus in negligence is on the manufacturer's cond......