Alger v. Easton
| Decision Date | 27 October 1875 |
| Citation | 119 Mass. 77 |
| Parties | Bernard H. Alger v. Inhabitants of Easton |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Bristol. Tort for assault and battery and false imprisonment. Trial in the Superior Court, before Aldrich, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows:
The plaintiff was assessed by the assessors of the defendant town, there being no want of integrity and fidelity on their part, for a poll tax for the year 1873. The assessors duly committed their tax list with their warrant to the collector of the defendant town. The collector afterwards duly issued a warrant to Rufus H. Willis, a deputy sheriff, residing in said town of Easton. The deputy, after due notice to the plaintiff, and for want of sufficient goods upon which to levy said tax, took the body of the plaintiff, and committed him to prison. The plaintiff paid the tax and costs on the following day and was discharged from imprisonment. The amount of the tax, which was two dollars, was afterwards paid into the town treasury by the collector.
The plaintiff admitted, and it appeared in evidence, that all the proceedings of the assessors, collector and deputy, were regular, and in legal and proper form; but contended and offered evidence tending to show that he was not an inhabitant of the town of Easton on May 1, 1873, and that he was then an inhabitant of West Bridgewater, an adjoining town, to which he moved in May, 1872.
The defendant asked the judge to rule, that if the plaintiff was not an inhabitant of Easton on May 1, 1873, and for that reason was improperly assessed by the assessors of the town and arrested and imprisoned as before stated, yet this action could not be maintained against the town.
The judge declined so to rule, but submitted the case to the jury upon instructions not objected to.
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant alleged exceptions.
Exceptions sustained.
E. H Bennett & H. J. Fuller, for the defendant, were stopped by the court.
J. Brown, for the plaintiff.
This action cannot be maintained. The assessors and collectors though elected by the inhabitants of the town, are not the agents of the town, but are public officers whose duties are prescribed by law. Dunbar v. Boston, 112 Mass. 75. If the tax was illegally assessed upon the plaintiff, his only remedy is by action of contract against the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bolster v. City of Lawrence
...government (Griggs v. Foote, 4 Allen, 195), licensing boards (McGinnis v. Medway, 176 Mass. 67, 57 N. E. 210), tax collectors (Alger v. Easton, 119 Mass. 77), constable and deputy collector of taxes (Dunbar v. Boston, 112 Mass. 75), overseers of the poor (New Bedford v. Taunton, 9 Allen, 20......
-
Bolster v. City of Lawrence
...41, 51, the city government, Griggs v. Foote, 4 Allen, 195, licensing boards, McGinnis v. Medway, 176 Mass. 67 , tax collectors, Alger v. Easton, 119 Mass. 77, and deputy collector of taxes, Dunbar v. Boston, 112 Mass. 75 , overseers of the poor, New Bedford v. Taunton, 9 Allen, 207, servan......
-
Burr v. City of Boston
... ... municipalities. Rossire v. Boston, 4 Allen, 57, 58; ... Dunbar v. Boston, 112 Mass. 75; Alger v ... Easton, 119 Mass. 77, 78; Welch v. Emerson, 206 ... Mass. 129, 130, 91 N.E. 1021; Cox v. Segee, 206 ... Mass. 380, 382, 92 N.E. 620; Gile ... ...
-
Blaser v. Town Manager of Methuen
...and interest. The manager appealed. We reverse. Assessors are public officers whose duties are prescribed by statute. See Alger v. Easton, 119 Mass. 77, 78 (1875); Hathaway v. Everett, 205 Mass. 246, 247, 91 N.E. 296 (1910). See also Assessors of Haverhill v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co., 33......