White v. Inhabitants of Levant
| Decision Date | 17 January 1887 |
| Citation | 7 A. 539,78 Me. 568 |
| Parties | WHITE v. INHABITANTS OF LEVANT. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
On motion for new trial by defendants from supreme judicial court, Penobscot county.
Assumpsit to recover compensation for services rendered the defendants by the plaintiff in his capacity as town agent. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and the defendants filed a motion for a new trial.
Barker, Vose & Barker, for plaintiff.
Jasper Hutchings and Charles Hamlin, for defendants.
The only question we find it necessary to consider is whether one who has accepted a town office to which neither the legislature nor the town has annexed any compensation can maintain an action to recover compensation for his official services. It is well settled that he cannot. The compensation of some town officers is provided for by statute. The compensation of assessors, selectmen, and overseers of the poor is thus provided for. Kev. St. c. 6, § 102. Such compensation may, of course, be recovered, whether the town is willing to pay it or not. So, if the town has expressly voted a compensation. But, in the absence of any such statute or vote, no compensation can be recovered. Talbot v. East Machias, 76 Me. 415; Sikes v. Hatfield, 13 Gray, 347; Walker v. Cook, 129 Mass. 578; Dill. Mun. Corp. (2d Ed.) § 169.
The plaintiff has obtained a verdict on a claim made up largely of charges for his official services as town agent. Unfortunately for him, neither the town nor the legislature has annexed any compensation to his office. The verdict, therefore, is contrary to law, and must be set aside. The motion is sustained, the verdict set aside, and a new trial granted.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hamer v. Weber County
...v. Supervisors of New York, 1 Hill 362; Griffin v. Clay County, 63 Iowa 413, 19 N.W. 327; Sikes v. Hatfield, 13 Gray 347; White v. Levant, 78 Me. 568, 7 A. 539; v. Mayor, etc., 81 N.Y. 255. I am of the opinion that in the case at bar it was the duty of the appellant to pay over all the mone......
-
Gibbs v. City of Manchester
...v. Portsmouth, 59 N. H. 18; Stone v. Towne, 67 N. H. 113, 29 Atl. 637; Saunders v. Nashua, 69 N. H. 492, 43 Atl. 620; White v. Levant, 78 Me. 568, 7 Atl. 539; Sikes v. Hatfield, 13 Gray, 347; Farnsworth v. Melrose, 122 Mass. 268; Farrell v. Bridgeport, 45 Conn. 191; Haswell v. New York, 81 ......
-
Beckwith v. Town of Farmington
...414, 12 Atl. 520; Pinney v. Brown, 60 Conn. 164, 169, 22 Atl. 430; O'Connor v. Waterbury, 69 Conn. 206, 211, 37 Atl. 499; White v. Levant, 78 Me. 568, 7 Atl. 539; Farnsworth v. Inhabitants of Melrose, 122 Mass. 268; Cochrane v. Inhabitants of Melrose, 121 Mass. 563; Sawyer v. Pawners' Bank,......
-
Kinney v. United States
...therefor, except where specific provision is made for the payment of such compensation. Dunwoody v. U. S., 23 Ct. Cl. 82; White v. Levant, 78 Me. 568, 7 A. 539. In of these conclusions, it seems unnecessary to discuss the effect of the statute of limitations, but, for the purpose of a full ......