Halleck v. Inhabitants of Boylston
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract to recover the amount of a tax paid under protest. The nature of the case appears in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtEndicott, J.
It was held in Andrews v. Boylston, 110 Mass. 214, that the vote of the defendant town, March 6, 1871, “ to reestablish the school district system,” was defective and insufficient, because the record failed to show that the vote was adopted by two thirds of the legal voters present and voting thereon, as required by the St. of 1870, e. 196. On January 23, 1873, after the judgment in that case,’ the town clerk then in office, who held the office when the vote was passed, and had remained in office by successive annual elections, amended the record by adding to the words “ to reestablish the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Welles v. BattelleMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Andrews v. Inhabitants of BoylstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Saxton v. NimmsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Adams v. PrattMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Wood v. SimonsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Chippewa Bridge Co. v. City of DurandWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Commissioner of Banks v. Cosmopolitan Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
- Garvey v. City of LowellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Carbone, Inc. v. KellyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1935
- Tod v. CrismanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.