Hodgdon v. Moulton

• Citation: 207 Mass. 445,93 N.E. 656
• Parties: HODGDON v. MOULTON et al.
• Decision Date: 06 January 1911
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

207 Mass. 445

93 N.E. 656

HODGDON v. MOULTON et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

January 6, 1911

COUNSEL

Walter S. Hodgdon, pro se.

G. M G. Nichols, for appellees.

OPINION

LORING J.

This action is entitled an action of tort. It is brought against the members of the municipal council of the city of Haverhill. As to which see St. 1908, c. 574, §§ 3, 20-33. The members filed a demurrer, the demurrer was sustained and judgment was entered in favor of the defendants. The case is here on the plaintiff's appeal from that judgment. The case stated by the plaintiff is entirely without foundation and under ordinary circumstances could be properly disposed of without more on stating that fact. But it is manifest that the plaintiff feels that he has been aggrieved by the defendants and that these grievances of his did not receive due consideration in the superior court. We have thought it wise under all the circumstances to add some words of explanation although they are so obvious that under ordinary circumstances they should be omitted.

The grievance alleged by the plaintiff is that the defendants having promised under oath to faithfully perform their duties as members of the municipal council, 'regardless of their said oaths, and on account of political maleficence, * * * have substituted partitality [partiality], collusion and anarchy, and abridged plaintiff's constitutional privileges and immunities' in eight particulars, to wit (1) He filed a petition with the defendants for the restoration of the old rates for street watering and it was denied without giving him a hearing; (2) he filed a petition for the removal of a police officer because (so the plaintiff stated) he had committed an unprovoked assault upon him and offered him an unprovoked insult; and this petition was denied without giving him a hearing; (3) he filed a petition for abatement of a street watering tax in excess of the old rates and this was put on file 'and he was not legally notified'; (4) the defendants allowed the friends of one Greul to stamp their feet and clap their hands at a hearing on a petition brought by Greul; (5) an ordinance was 'filed' by the plaintiff dealing with charges to be made by 'plumbers et alii' and this petition was put on file 'and the plaintiff was not legally notified' (6) on petition of one Ballard for an increase in hack fares the defendants voted 'to grant the prayer after...