Walker v. Laurel Urban Renewal Agency, 51809

Citation383 So.2d 149
Decision Date07 May 1980
Docket NumberNo. 51809,51809
PartiesGuy M. WALKER v. LAUREL URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY et al.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi

J. Larry Walters, Guy M. Walker, Laurel, for appellant.

Roberts & Easterling, M. M. Roberts, Hattiesburg, for appellees.

Before ROBERTSON, LEE and BOWLING, JJ.

LEE, Justice, for the Court:

Guy M. Walker filed suit in the Circuit Court of Jones County against the City of Laurel, Laurel Urban Renewal Agency, Reeves Construction Company and Bush Construction Company for damages alleged to have been sustained to Walker's office building from vibrations to the structure when a sidewalk adjoining the building was demolished in the course of work on an urban renewal project in Laurel. At the conclusion of the plaintiff's case, Reeves Construction Company was granted a directed verdict and at the conclusion of all the evidence, the court sustained the motion of City of Laurel and Laurel Urban Renewal Agency for a directed verdict. The plaintiff nonsuited as to Bush Construction Company and has appealed the judgment here.

The question before the Court is whether or not the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict in favor of the City of Laurel and Laurel Urban Renewal Agency.

The parties admit that Laurel Urban Renewal Agency is an agency of the City of Laurel and that certain street construction work was being performed by Bush Construction Company, subcontractor of Reeves Construction Company, on behalf of said city and agency. Under the construction contract, Bush was engaged in demolishing a sidewalk adjoining the office building of appellant. The declaration charged, and the proof for plaintiff indicated, although it was in conflict with that offered by appellees, that Bush broke up and removed a concrete walk along the front of appellant's building to a point within eighteen (18) inches of the building by dropping the weight of a front end loader upon the concrete. The weight and the force of the loader, as charged and testified to by plaintiff and his witnesses, caused the building to vibrate, strain and crack, and the building was damaged as a result. Appellees' evidence was to the effect that the building had been in a bad state of repair for a long period of time, that the cracks in the building were old cracks and that there was no causal connection between the work done by Bush and the condition of the building afterwards.

Appellant relies upon Section 17, Miss.Const.1890, for his claim. The section provides that private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without due compensation being paid. He bases his claim, not on negligence of the appellees or the contractors involved, but on the proposition that the construction work of Bush damaged the building and that he was entitled to compensation from the City of Laurel for the amount of that damage.

In Pigott v. Boeing Company, 240 So.2d 63 (Miss.1970), suit was brought by Pigott for damages alleged to have been caused by Boeing from vibrations resulting when Boeing tested a booster rocket, under a contract with the United States government. While not reaching the question of liability of the United States, this Court said:

"In our opinion this question is answered by Curtis v. Mississippi State Highway Comm'n and Continental, Inc., 195 So.2d 497 (Miss.1967). The Court held that the contractor was not liable for damages resulting from the contractor's execution of the work of constructing a highway in accordance with the plans and specifications and under the direction of the state highway engineers if such improvement was made without negligence. The landowner's remedy, if any, is against the public agency having the work done. In the absence of negligence on the part of Boeing, the plaintiffs' remedy, if any, for damages suffered to their property is against the United States." 240 So.2d at 64.

In City of Jackson v. Cook, 214 Miss. 201, 58 So.2d 498 (1952), the appellees sued the City of Jackson for damages to a lot and improvements thereon resulting from flooding same when the City drained water off...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Bell v. City of Bay St. Louis
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1985
    ...approximately results. City of Laurel v. Upton, 253 Miss. 380, 395, 175 So.2d 621, 626 (1965); see also, Walker v. Laurel Urban Renewal Agency, 383 So.2d 149, 150 fn. 1 (Miss.1980); and Bush v. City of Laurel, 215 So.2d 256, 257 It is against the backdrop of this rule that Plaintiff Bell fi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT