Nash v. Inhabitants of Sorrento
| Decision Date | 26 June 1919 |
| Citation | 107 A. 32 |
| Parties | NASH v. INHABITANTS OF SORRENTO. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Report from Bar Harbor Municipal Court, at Law.
Action by Vivian Nash against the Inhabitants of Sorrento. Case reported. Judgment for defendant.
Argued before CORNISH, C. J., and SPEAR, HANSON, DUNN, WILSON, and DEASY, JJ.
Percy L. Aiken, of Bangor, for plaintiff.
W. B. Blalsdell, of Sullivan, for defendant.
DEASY, J. Action brought by the wife of a man in the United Stares naval service against the town of Sorrento to recover "state aid" of $4 per week, provided by chapter 276 of the Laws of 1917.
The act provides, in substance, that the state aid, so called, shall in the first instance be paid by towns, and that the towns shall be reimbursed by the state.
Section 10 of chapter 276 is as follows:
"If any city, town or plantation, or the municipal officers thereof, shall neglect or refuse to comply with the provisions of this act according to its true intent and meaning, and to the satisfaction of the governor and council, such city, town or plantation, or the municipal officers thereof, as the case may be, shall forfeit and pay the sum of one hundred dollars, one half to the use of the aggrieved party and one half to the county where the cause is tried, to be recovered by an action on the case in any court proper to try the same."
Where a statute creates a new right, but provides no remedy for its enforcement, a remedy exists by implication. Stearns v. Railroad Co., 46 Me. 95; Rackliff v. Greenbush, 93 Me. 99, 44 Atl. 375; Ricker Classical Institute v. Mapleton, 101 Me. 553, 64 Atl. 948.
If, however, the statute conferring the right provides a remedy, such remedy is ordinarily exclusive. Pollock v. Eastern Railroad Co., 124 Mass. 158; Thayer v. Kitchen, 200 Mass. 382, 86 N. E. 952; Great Western Co. v. State, 181 Ind. 28, 102 N. E. 849, 103 N. E. 843; Evers v. Davis, 86 N. J. Law, 196, 90 Atl. 677; Schmidt v. Milwaukee, 149 Wis. 367, 135 N. W. 883; State v. Western & A. R. Co., 136 Ga. 619, 71 S. E. 1055; Farmers' National Bank v. Deering, 91 U. S. 29, 23 L. Ed. 196; Yates v. Jones National Bank, 206 U. S. 158, 27 Sup. Ct. 638, 51 L. Ed. 1002.
There is a further class of cases holding that, where statutes do not create new rights, but are merely declaratory of common-law rights, remedies provided by such statutes are cumulative, and not exclusive. Train v. Boston Disinfecting Co., 144 Mass. 523, 11 N. E. 929, 59 Am. Rep. 113; Pollock v. Eastern Railroad Co., 124 Mass. 158; King v. Viscolold Company, 219 Mass. 420, 106 N. E. 988, Ann. Cas. 1916D, 1170; Field v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ehrhart v. King Cnty.
...that when a statute gives a new right and no specific remedy, the common law will provide a remedy." (citing Nash v. Inhabitants of Sorrento , 118 Me. 224, 107 A. 32 (1919) )); see generally Bennett v. Hardy , 113 Wash.2d 912, 921-21, 784 P.2d 1258 (1990) (setting out three-step inquiry for......
-
Million v. Metro. Cas. Ins. Co. , 13886.
...109;Schmidt v. City of Milwaukee, 149 Wis. 367, 135 N. W. 883;Singer, etc., Co. v. Teasley, 198 Ala. 673, 73 So. 969;Nash v. Inhabitants of Sorrento, 118 Me. 224, 107 A. 32;Osgood v. Names, 191 Iowa, 1227, 184 N. W. 331; Cook v. Lehigh Valley R. Co. (Sup.) 181 N. E. S. 217; Bailey v. Collee......
-
State ex rel. Breslin v. Todd
... ... 380; Heeney v. Sprague, 11 ... R.I. [8 Wn.2d 485] 456, 23 Am.Rep. 502; Nash v ... Inhabitants of Sorrento, 118 Me. 224, 107 A. 32; ... Jefferson County Farm ... ...
-
King Resources Co. v. Environmental Imp. Commission
...procedures for relief, then we must assume the Legislature intended the same to be exclusive and not cumulative. Nash v. Inhabitants of Sorrento, 1919, 118 Me. 224, 107 A. 32; Jameson v. Cunningham, 1936, 134 Me. 134, 183 A. 131. We continue to subscribe to this Furthermore, in Stanton v. T......