Fisk v. City of Springfield
| Decision Date | 22 October 1874 |
| Citation | 116 Mass. 88 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
| Parties | George C. Fisk & others v. City of Springfield |
Hampden. Petition in equity filed August 27, 1874, under the Gen. Sts. c. 18, § 79, [*] by ten taxable inhabitants of Springfield, to restrain the city council and all officers, agents and servants of the city, from carrying out the orders of the city council for the payment of money, or borrowing money on the notes of the city to pay for the damages caused by the alteration of the grades of Main Street and Chestnut Street in accordance with those orders, the substance of which is stated in the cases of Powers & Noyes v. City Council of Springfield, ante, 84, 87. The city demurred to the petition, and the case was thereupon heard and reserved by Endicott, J., for the determination of the full court.
Petition dismissed, with costs.
A. L. Soule, for the respondent.
H. Morris, (B. F. Thomas with him,) for the petitioners, cited Cooley v. Granville, 10 Cush. 56; Hood v. Lynn, 1 Allen 103; Frost v. Belmont, 6 Allen 152; Copeland v. Huntington, 99 Mass. 525.
The city council of Springfield being a tribunal having general jurisdiction of the subject of altering the grade of highways in the city, (as has been decided in the cases of Powers & Noyes v. City Council of Springfield, ante, 84, 87,) the validity of its orders as to such alterations of Main Street and Chestnut Street, and the payment of damages therefor, can only be impeached directly by a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash them, and not collaterally by a petition in equity to restrain the appropriation and payment of money under them.
Petition dismissed, with costs.
---------
Notes:
[*]"When a town votes to raise by taxation or pledge of its credit, or to pay from its treasury any money, for a purpose other than those for which it has the legal right and power, the Supreme Judicial Court may, upon the suit or petition of not less than ten taxable inhabitants thereof, briefly setting forth the cause of complaint, hear and determine the same in equity."
---------
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reynolds v. Board of Appeal of Springfield
...board is not, as the plaintiffs appear to contend, in itself a basis for equitable action to annul its proceedings. In Fisk v. City of Springfield, 116 Mass. 88, in sustaining a demurrer we said at page 89: 'The city council * * * being a tribunal having general jurisdiction of the subject ......
-
Dube v. Mayor of City of Fall River
...for the purpose of reviewing the action of municipal authorities in laying out, altering and discontinuing public highways. Fisk v. Springfield, 116 Mass. 88;Davis v. County Commissioners, 153 Mass. 218, 26 N.E. 848,11 L.R.A. 750;Hammond v. County Commissioners, 154 Mass. 509, 28 N.E. 902. ......
-
Amory v. Assessors of Boston
...on the ground of fraud imposed upon a town, or to test the reasonableness of rates charged by a town for supplying water. Fisk v. Springfield, 116 Mass. 88 . Prince v. Boston, 148 Mass. 285 . Parsons v. Northampton, 154 Mass. 410 . Seward v. Revere Water Co. 201 Mass. 453 . Kelley v. Board ......
-
Amory v. Assessors of Boston
...on the ground of fraud imposed upon a town, or to test the reasonableness of rates charged by a town for supplying water. Fisk v. Springfield, 116 Mass. 88;Prince v. Boston, 148 Mass. 285, 19 N.E. 218;Parsons v. Northampton, 154 Mass. 410, 28 N.E. 350;Seward v. Revere Water Co., 201 Mass. 4......