Cressey v. Parks
Decision Date | 19 December 1884 |
Citation | 76 Me. 532 |
Parties | WARREN CRESSEY v. JOSEPH PARKS. |
Court | Maine Supreme Court |
ON REPORT.
The opinion states the case.
Davis and Bailey, for the plaintiff.
Without reviewing the cases where similar questions have been affirmatively decided we think in the case, Carpenter v Dresser, 72 Me. 380, PETERS, J., states the principle fairly upon which this claim is made, and with sufficient fullness for the purposes of this argument. He says:
It is difficult to perceive of any logical argument in support of this theory. It seems to be rather an equitable presumption to modify the rigor of an application of strict legal principles.
As directly opposed to this and more analogous to legal cause and effect is the position of the Vermont court upon the same question.
The case of Hall v. Ray, 40 Vt. 576, was that of an officer proceeding irregularly in the sale of chattels on execution whereby he became a trespasser, and having applied the proceeds on the execution claimed to have the amount allowed him in reduction of the damages. He was however charged with the full value of the goods taken, and the court say, pp. 579-80:
But in any event to avail defendant, we think it should appear that he has paid the money to the town, and has it no longer under his control, that the tax has been paid to the town in fact. The report is silent on this point.
An examination of the copy of assessments on page three of the report shows no valid assessments of the taxes in controversy. There is no tax on real estate because no real estate is described. Harpswell v. Orr, 69 Me. 333; Vassalboro v. Nowell, 75 Maine 242.
Barker, Vose and Barker, and A. L. Simpson, for the defendant.
The defendant, a collector, seized the plaintiff's hay for non-payment of taxes and sold it at auction. All of the proceedings were regular excepting that the collector held the hay one day too long before selling. For this mistake the plaintiff is to recover against him the full value of the hay in the present action...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Inhabitants of Town of Owls Head v. Dodge
...'When forfeitures are not involved, proceedings for the collection of taxes should be construed practically and liberally.' Cressey v. Parks, 76 Me. 532; Inhabitants of Norridgewock v. Walker, 71 Me. 181; Bath v. Whitmore, 79 Me. 182, 9 A. 119. In Inhabitants of Athens v. Whittier, 122 Me. ......
-
Thompson v. Gaudette
...punctiliously complied with.' Brown v. Veazie, 25 Me. 359. "To prevent forfeitures strict constructions are not unreasonable.' Cressey v. Parks, 76 Me. 532. "It is deemed essential to the validity of a tax sale of lands that there shall be a strict compliance with all the directions of the ......
-
Inhabitants of Town of Milo v. Milo Water Co.
...of property for unpaid taxes, are not applicable where the remedy sought is by an ordinary suit at law to collect unpaid taxes. Cressey v. Parks, 76 Me. 532; Rockland v. Ulmer, 84 Me. 503, 24 A. 949; Rockland v. Ulmer, 87 Me. 357, 32 A. 972. As was said in Cressey v. Parks, where the distin......
-
City of Old Town v. Robbins
...power. Baxter v. Jersey City, 36 N.J.Law (7 Vroom) 188, 191. To prevent forfeitures, strict constructions are not unreasonable. Cressey v. Parks, 76 Me. 532; Charleston v. Lawry, 89 Me. 582, 36 A. 1103; Baker v. Webber, 102 Me. 414, 67 A. 144; Milo v. Water Company, 131 Me. 372, 163 A. The ......