Case ID: wv-ct-cl_4/html/0174-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MERRIMAN S. SMITH, JUDGE. ROBERT L. BLAND, JUDGE,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(No. 639-S
    ELIZABETH YOUNG, Claimant, v. STATE ROAD COMMISSION, Respondent.
    
      Opinion filed October 18, 1948
    
   MERRIMAN S. SMITH, JUDGE.

Claimant Elizabeth Young, of Marietta, Ohio, was driving her automobile across the Williamstown-Marietta bridge, in Wood County, West Virginia, on June 2, 1948. The wooden floor at that time was in very bad condition and one of the spikes penetrated the left front tire and tube and damaged them beyond repair. By statute, code 17-4-88, Michie’s code 1474(15), provision is made for regular inspection of all bridges and for proper repairs to be made.

It is apparent from the record before this court that the floor of the bridge was in bad condition and not safe for the traveling public, and no contributory negligence was shown on the part of the claimant, and since this claim was concurred in by the state road commissioner and approved by the attorney general, an award in the amount of sixteen dollars and seventy cents ($16.70) is hereby granted by a majority of the court to claimant Elizabeth Young.

ROBERT L. BLAND, JUDGE,

dissenting.

The state road commissioner concurs in the claim involved in this case. It is approved by the attorney general’s office.

The facts certified to this court by the state road commissioner to support his concurrence in the claim are stated as follows:

“On June 2, 1948, while crossing the Wi.lliams-town-Marietta bridge, one of the spikes in the floor of the bridge pierced the left front tire of car ruining the tire and tube.”

If the state were suable could the claimant successfully maintain his action against the state road commission upon the above facts? I think not.

I respectfully dissent to the award made by majority members of the court.