Court Opinion

ID: 9574748
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 21:07:44.264039+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:44:54.455145
License: Public Domain

Bobbitt, J.,
concurring. Under the Tort Claims Act, G.S., Ch. 143, Art. 31, the basis of liability is “a negligent act of a State employee while acting within the scope of his employment.” (Italics added.) Ordinarily, a prisoner is not considered “a State employee.” “Employed,” as used in G.S. 148-49.3, indicates the activities in which the prisoners at Camp Butner are to engage, rather than their relationship to the State. Such prisoner, when acting for the State and as directed by his superior, may rightly be considered an agent of the State.
*337Is “employee” synonymous with “agent?” An employee is an agent, but an agent is not necessarily an employee.
In my opinion, our Tort Claims Act should be strictly construed. This is in accord with the rulings of most courts. 49 Am. Jur., States, Territories, and Dependencies, sec. 97; 81 CJS, States, sec. 215. Waiver of immunity beyond the provisions of the Act as strictly construed is a matter for determination by the General Assembly.
Under strict construction, the claimant cannot recover in this proceeding.