Matthews v. Inhabitants of Westborough
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract to recover $500, alleged to have been voted to the plaintiff by the defendant town. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Aldrich, J., the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtDevens, J.
It is in the power of towns to settle claims which may be made upon them arising out of their administration of their municipal affairs. A vote to appropriate money for such a purpose is therefore binding upon them, even if upon subsequent examination it is ascertained that the claim which was to be settled thereby was one which could not have been successfully maintained. Nelson v. Milford, 7 Pick. 18. Bancroft v. Lynnfield, 18 Pick. 566. They have no authority to appropriate money for gratuities to persons whose situation may appeal to public sympathy. Fowler v. Danvers, 8 Allen, 80. Cooley…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Town of Burlington v. DunnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1945
- Prout v. Inhabitants of the Fire District in PittsfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Codman v. DumaineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
- Quinlan v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Whittaker v. City of SalemMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.