Major v. City of Hartsville

Summary

The South Carolina Supreme Court reversed a Court of Appeals decision affirming summary judgment for the City of Hartsville in a premises-liability action under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the city had constructive notice of a rut and whether the recurring nature of the defect constituted a continual condition sufficient to establish constructive notice.

Holdings

1. Yes. The testimony created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the rut existed long enough that the City, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have discovered it.
2. Yes. The recurring nature of the defect created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether it constituted a continual condition giving rise to constructive notice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the City had constructive notice of the rut under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act.
2. Whether the recurring nature of the rut-producing condition could constitute a continual condition sufficient to support constructive notice and defeat summary judgment.

Disposition

reversed