The full Commission affirmed and adopted the Deputy Commissioner's decision. Since we are reviewing a ruling on a motion to dismiss, we treat plaintiffs' allegations as true. 85 N.C. App. Plaintiffs allege that on 3 September 1991, a hydraulic fuel line near a deep fat fryer in the processing section of the plant ruptured, igniting hydraulic fuel from a natural gas fume cooker. Defendants had never inspected the plant, despite the occurrence of two other fires at the plant, one in 1980 and another in 1983.
Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that defendants' failure to inspect the plant was negligent.
As a preliminary matter, we note that ordinarily, the denial of a motion to dismiss is not immediately appealable. However, since defendants' motion is based on sovereign immunity, its denial is properly before us. 117 N.C. App. Defendants argue that because they owed no duty to plaintiffs, they cannot be held liable to them under the Tort Claims Act. The first reason they cite for lack of duty is the public duty doctrine.