Jenkins v. Griffith

Per Curiam.

The corporate defendant was created by chapter 383, Public-Local Laws 1921, and vested with certain duties and powers which hitherto had been exercised by the Board of Commissioners of *634 Mecklenburg County. This defendant exercises only governmental functions — builds, maintains and controls public roads in Mecklenburg County, wbicb are not a part of the State system, and has charge of the county convicts, as provided by its charter above cited.

Neither phase of the duties of this defendant exceeds the limits of purely governmental functions. Hence, this action cannot be maintained against the defendant, Mecklenburg Highway Commission.

Scales v. Winston-Salem, ante, 469;

Moody v. State Prison, 128 N. C., 12 ;

Murdock Grate Co. v. Commonwealth, 152 Mass., 28 ;

Baker v. Spencer State Hospital (W.

Va.), 121 S. E., 497 ;

Bourne v. Hart, 93 Cal., 321 ;

County Commissioners v. Duckett, 20 Md., 468 ; 83 Am. Dec., 557 , and note;

Clodfelter v. State, 86 N. C., 51 ;

White v. Commissioners, 90 N. C., 437 ;

Burbank v. Commissioners, 92 N. C., 257 ;

Manuel v. Commissioners, 98 N. C., 9 ;

Threadgill v. Commissioners, 99 N. C., 352 ;

Moffitt v. Asheville, 103 N. C., 237 ;

Pritchard v. Commissioners, 126 N. C., 908 ;

Bell v. Commissioners, 127 N. C., 85 ;

Jones v. Commissioners, 130 N. C., 451 ;

Hitch v. Commissioners, 132 N. C., 573 ;

Keenan v. Commissioners, 167 N. C., 356 ;

Snider v. High Point, 168 N. C., 608 ;

Sandlin v. Wilmington, 185 N. C., 257 .

Therefore, the judgment of the trial court, dismissing this action as to the Mecklenburg Highway Commission, is Affirmed.