Allegany County v. Seaber

⁵²⁸ Urner, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellee while passing along the wooden sidewalk of a public bridge over the Potomac River between Western-port, in Allegany County, Maryland, and Piedmont, m Mineral County, West Virginia, was injured by having her foot and limb caught and wrenched in a hole in the flooring caused by the breaking off sometime previously of a small portion of one of the boards near the bridge railing. A suit against the Boad Directors of Allegany County, a body corporate, for the injuries thus sustained resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed. There is an exception to the refusal of the trial Court to withdraw the case from the jury.

It is not denied, and upon the record it could not be doubted, that if the defendant is capable of being charged at all with responsibility for accidents resulting from a failure to keep the bridge in repair, there is in the particular case now before us a legal sufficiency of evidence to support recovery. The defense, however, raised under the general prayer just mentioned, and specifically stated in the defendant’s sixth prayer, which was also rejected, is that according to the uncontradicted evidence the bridge upon which the injury sued for occurred was wholly within the corporate limits of the town of Westernport, a municipal corporation, duly empowered .by the laws of the State to exercise control over the streets, alleys, highways and bridges within its limits, and that' the defendant had, therefore, m jurisdiction over'the bridge in question and no authority to make expenditures for its maintenance or repair. The present bridge between Westernport and Piedmont, which replaced one formerly occupying the same site for a long period of time, was erected about ten years ago by Allegany County, under an agreement with the County Court of Mineral County, West Virginia, in pursuance of which each of the contracting parties paid one-half of the cost of the construction. TÜé towns of Westernport and Piedmont, whose inhabitants were desirous of having sidewalks on the ⁵²⁹ bridge, were to make contributions towards meeting the additional expense thus occasioned.

It is left uncertain by the record as to whether .Piedmont paid its proportion of the cost of adding the sidewalk, but the evidence shows definitely that Westemport did not contribute. The agreement between the two counties provided that the expense of keeping the bridge in repair should be chargeable to the counties and municipal corporations mentioned in proportion to the amounts paid by each towards its erection. It appears from the proof that the Hoad Directors of Allegany County have had control of the bridge and assumed the duty of making the necessary repairs, and that they have been reimbursed to the extent of one-half of the cost of this work by the County Court of Mineral County. Heither of the municipalities has made any payments on account of the repairs.

The boundary lines of the town of Westemport, of the county of Allegany, and of the State of Maryland are coincident on the southern shore of the Potomac Hiver at the point where the bridge in question enters Piedmont. It is in evidence that the whole of the bridge, with the possible exception of the abutment at the southern terminus, is located within 1ho corporato limits of Westemport. The hole which caused the plaintiffs injury was near the end of the bridge on the Maryland side of the river,. • ■ The Hoad Directors of Allegany County are a body corpora to, created by Chapter 262 of the Acts of 1904, which amended the Code of Public Local Laws of the 'county. It was provided by Section 212 that “their powers,duties and obligations with respect to the public reads'in Allegany County shall be co-extensive with -the powers, duties and obligations heretofore resting upon the -County Commissioners of Allegany County with respect to the public roads and bridges in said county, except in so far as the same may' be modified or chaaiged by the provisions of this- Act.” They were authorized and directed by Section 216A to “take charge and supervision of all roads and bridges in Allegany County,” and to