Kneece v. City of Columbia
| Citation | 123 S.E. 100,128 S.C. 375 |
| Decision Date | 13 May 1924 |
| Docket Number | 11508. |
| Parties | KNEECE v. CITY OF COLUMBIA. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Richland County; W. H. Townsend, Judge.
Action by J. J. Kneece against the City of Columbia. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
C. S. Monteith, of Columbia, for appellant.
C. T. Graydon and Cole L. Blease, both of Columbia, for respondent.
Action for damages on account of the alleged negligent installation and management of an incinerator, whereby the plaintiff's property had been damaged by reason of the noxious and disagreeable odors consequent upon its operation. From a judgment of $450 in favor of the plaintiff, the defendant has appealed.
The appellant relies upon the following propositions for a reversal of the judgment:
(1) That the cause of action stated in the complaint is not maintainable against a municipal corporation, in the absence of a statute authorizing it.
(2) That assuming that the delict complained of constituted a public nuisance, the evidence fails to show that the plaintiff has suffered any damages differing in kind from what the general public has suffered.
As to the first proposition: Opposed to the opinion of the writer, the court has decided to the contrary, in the case of Faust v. Richland County, 117 S.C. 251, 109 S.E. 151, followed by the case of Derrick v. Columbia, 122 S.C. 29, 114 S.E. 857.
As to the second proposition: It is held in the case of Belton v. Wateree Power Co., 123 S.C. 291, 115 S.E. 587, that although the plaintiff may not have suffered damage different in kind as well as in degree, he has a cause of action based upon negligent operation, which the complaint alleges in this case.
The judgment must therefore be affirmed, and it is so ordered.
GARY, C.J., did not participate.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Caldwell v. Carroll
...... following sustain his order: Derrick v. City of. Columbia, 122 S.C. 29, 114 S.E. 857; McNinch v. City. of Columbia, 128 S.C. 54, 122 S.E. 03; Kneece v. City of Columbia, 128 S.C. 375, 123 S.E. 100; Wilson. v. City of Laurens, 134 S.C. 271, 132 ......
-
Chick Springs Water Co., Inc. v. State Highway Dept.
...22, 104 S.E. 309; Faust v. Richland County, 117 S.C. 251, 109 S.E. 151; Derrick v. Columbia, 122 S.C. 29, 114 S.E. 857; Kneece v. Columbia, 128 S.C. 375, 123 S.E. 100." trial court, in sustaining the demurrer, held that the only remedy which the plaintiff would have under the facts of this ......
-
Gasque v. Town of Conway
...... without express statutory authority therefor. Gibbes v. Beaufort, 20 S.C. 213; Parks v. City Council of. Greenville, 44 S.C. 168, 21 S.E. 540; Bryant v. City. Council of Orangeburg, 70 S.C. ... property itself. This principle is illustrated by such cases. as Kneece v. City of Columbia, 128 S.C. 375, 123. S.E. 100, which was an action for damages to property, ......
-
Chewning v. Clarendon County
...... upon which such liability is predicated. Bryant v. City. Council, 70 S.C. 137, 49 S.E. 229; Gibbes v. Beaufort, 2O S. C. 218; White v. City Council, 2. Hill, 572; Coleman v. Chester, 14 S.C. 290;. Black v. Columbia, 19 S.C. 412, 45 Am. Rep. 785;. Young v. City Council, 20 S.C. 116, 47 Am. Rep. 827;. Dunn v. ... 117 S.C. 251, 109 S.E. 151; Derrick v. Columbia, 122. S.C. 29, 114 S.E. 857; Kneece v. Columbia, 128 S.C. 375, 123. S.E. 100.". . . As the. court says in ......