Cheney v. Inhabitants of Dover
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
| Writing for the Court | KNOWLTON |
| Citation | 205 Mass. 501,91 N.E. 1005 |
| Parties | CHENEY et al. v. INHABITANTS OF DOVER. |
| Decision Date | 17 May 1910 |
CHENEY et al.
v.
INHABITANTS OF DOVER.*
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Norfolk.
May 17, 1910.
Appeal from Superior Court, Suffolk County.
Petition by Benjamin P. Cheney and another, trustees under the will of Benjamin P. Cheney, deceased, to abate a tax assessed by the Assessors of the Town of Dover. From an order of the superior court, dismissing an appeal from the refusal of the assessors to abate the tax, the petitioners appeal. Affirmed.
[205 Mass. 504]Gaston, Snow & Saltonstall, for appellants.
S. H. Hudson and Philip Nichols, for respondents.
[205 Mass. 502]KNOWLTON, C. J.
These petitioners presented to the assessors of the town of Dover an application for an abatement of a tax alleged to have been assessed erroneously. The assessors refused to abate the tax, and gave written notice to the petitioners of their decision, as required by Rev. Laws, c. 12, § 76. This notice was given on June 29, 1909. The petitioners, feeling aggrieved by the refusal of the assessors, and acting under the provision which is found in Rev. Laws, c. 12, § 78, and in St. 1909, c. 490, p. 1, § 77, attempted to take an appeal to the superior court, and on Thursday, August 5, 1909, filed in that court the petition or complaint which is now before us. In it they set forth, among other things, that they were aggrieved by the refusal of the assessors to grant the abatement applied for, and that they therefore appealed from the refusal to the court. By the terms of the sections above referred to, an appeal to the superior court may be taken ‘by entering a complaint in said court on the first day after the expiration of thirty days from the giving of the notice’ of their decision by the assessors, as required by the preceding section. The statutory return day in the superior court is the first Monday of every month. Rev. Laws, c. 167, § 24. The petitioners took out an order of notice on this petition, returnable on the first Monday of September, and caused it to be served upon the inhabitants of the town.
The respondents contended that the complaint or petition was entered in the superior court 3 days too late, and they appeared specially and filed a motion to dismiss for that reason. This motion having been allowed by the court, the case comes before us on an appeal by the petitioners. They cotend that the entry intended by the statute was an entry after service of notice on the respondents, and they rely in part upon the provision that a writ against a town must be served 30 days before the return day. They argue that the entry in this case was seasonable.
[205 Mass. 503]We are of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carstensen v. Cambridge Zoning Bd. of Appeals
...remedy within the time frame set forth deprives the appeals board of jurisdiction to review actions concerning permits. Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N.E. 1005 (1910). DelGrosso v. Board of Appeals of Revere, 330 Mass. 29, 32, 110 N.E.2d 836 (1953). Kolodny v. Board of Appeals of ......
-
Old Colony R. Co. v. Bd. of Assessors of Quincy
...76, 74 A.L.R. 1213, and while a motion to dismiss on the ground of a late entry in the Superior Court was sustained in Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 91 N.E. 1005, it is not necessary to determine whether such a motion was appropriate in proceedings before an administrative board as we pre......
-
Hamilton Mfg. Co. v. City of Lowell
...as to procedure in actions at common law are not applicable. No process is required to be served in such complaint. Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N. E. 1005. Cases like Freeman v. Hedrington, 204 Mass. 238, 90 N. E. 519,17 Ann. Cas. 741, to the effect that the cause of action must......
-
Lever Bros. Co. v. Commonwealth
...258, 88 N. E. 769. The court has no jurisdiction to entertain proceedings for relief begun at a later time. Cheney v. Assessors of Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N. E. 1005;International Paper Co. v. Commonwealth, 121 N. E. 510. The remedies given by the statute are expressly made exclusive ......
-
Carstensen v. Cambridge Zoning Bd. of Appeals
...remedy within the time frame set forth deprives the appeals board of jurisdiction to review actions concerning permits. Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N.E. 1005 (1910). DelGrosso v. Board of Appeals of Revere, 330 Mass. 29, 32, 110 N.E.2d 836 (1953). Kolodny v. Board of Appeals of ......
-
Old Colony R. Co. v. Bd. of Assessors of Quincy
...76, 74 A.L.R. 1213, and while a motion to dismiss on the ground of a late entry in the Superior Court was sustained in Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 91 N.E. 1005, it is not necessary to determine whether such a motion was appropriate in proceedings before an administrative board as we pre......
-
Hamilton Mfg. Co. v. City of Lowell
...as to procedure in actions at common law are not applicable. No process is required to be served in such complaint. Cheney v. Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N. E. 1005. Cases like Freeman v. Hedrington, 204 Mass. 238, 90 N. E. 519,17 Ann. Cas. 741, to the effect that the cause of action must......
-
Lever Bros. Co. v. Commonwealth
...258, 88 N. E. 769. The court has no jurisdiction to entertain proceedings for relief begun at a later time. Cheney v. Assessors of Dover, 205 Mass. 501, 503, 91 N. E. 1005;International Paper Co. v. Commonwealth, 121 N. E. 510. The remedies given by the statute are expressly made exclusive ......