Tate v. City of Greensboro

Citations

• 19 S.E. 767
• 114 N.C. 392

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Authority — Control of Streets — Right to Cut Down Shade Trees — Street Committee — Damnum A bsque Injuria.</p> <p>1. A city lias exactly the same rights in and is under the same responsibilities for a street which it controls by dedication only as in and for one which has been granted or condemned; and the rights of the abutting proprietor are no greater in such street than if it had been granted or condemned.</p> <p>2. The law gives to municipal corporations an almost absolute discretion in the maintenance of their streets, since wide discretion as to the manner of performance should be conferred where responsibility for improper performance is so heavily laid.</p> <p>3. The charter of the city of Greensboro and the general law of the State {Tin1 Code, ch. 62, Vol. II) give to the municipal authorities of that city wide discretion in the control and improvement of its streets, and if damage result to an abutting property owner by reason of acts done by it neither negligently nor maliciously and wantonly, but in good faith in the careful exercise of that discretion, it is damnum ahsque. injuria.</p> <p>4. The Courts will not interfere with the exercise of a discretion reposed in the municipal authorities of a city as to when and to what extent its streets shall be improved, except in cases of fraud and oppression constituting manifest abuse of such discretion.</p> <p>5. The power given to a city over the streets can be delegated to a street committee composed of members of the Board of Aldermen, and the members of such committee, acting as such and within the limits of the power of the city, are not answerable, individually, for damage resulting- from their acts.</p> <p>(Avery, J., dissents arguendo, in which MacRae, J., concurs).</p>