Court
grants summary judgment in bridge lawsuit
By Thomas Wilson
STAR STAFF
twilson@starhq.com
A Circuit Court ruling has granted Carter County
government a summary judgment in a lawsuit filed by a Roan Mountain
couple involving a wagon accident that occurred over two years
ago on a rural one-lane bridge crossing the Doe River.
John R. Reed and Margaret Reed filed a lawsuit
in Carter County Circuit Court last August alleging negligence
against the county resulting from an accident that occurred
on Old Railroad Grade Road in Roan Mountain in August 2000.
Judge Jean Stanley granted the county's motion
for summary judgment last week.
According to Stanley's written order, the bridge
was not found dangerous and the county did not act negligently
in the time period when guardrails were installed on the bridge
two weeks before the Reeds' accident.
Their lawsuit stated that the couple was crossing
the bridge in a covered wagon on Old Railroad Grade Road in
August 2000. The filing reads that the wagon was being pulled
by a horse and a mule.
The mule side-stepped a puddle of water on the
bridge and slipped off the bridge, subsequently pulling the
horse and wagon carrying the couple across the bridge, according
to the Reeds' filing.
John Reed was thrown forward but managed to grab
a section of the bridge to avoid falling into the river, according
to the suit. The mule had to be cut from its harness and fell
into the river sustaining injuries, the suit read.
The Reeds had sought a total of $530,000 in compensatory
damages against the county, according to the initial lawsuit.
Margaret Reed stated in her deposition she had
repeatedly complained about the safety of the bridge to county
Highway Superintendent Jack Perkins.
In their answer to the suit, the county denied
ownership of the bridge but acknowledged they had maintained
the bridge.
The court ruled the bridge could not be identified
as "defective, unsafe or dangerous" given that there had been
no accidents at the bridge except for one drunk driver since
the bridge was built between 1916 and 1918.
The couple had complained about the bridge's safety
and had requested guardrails to be installed on the bridge.
Stanley's order stated it was a discretionary function to install
guardrails on the bridge and that Perkins ordered guardrails
to be installed "some two weeks" before the Reeds were injured.
Stanley ruled there was no evidence of negligence
in the two-week delay citing that " ... despite Plaintiffs'
complaints, there had been no accidents or injuries involving
sober persons in over 80 years."
Costs of the action were taxed primarily to the
plaintiffs, according to the order.