Dyer v. City of Belfast
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions. The case is stated in the opinion. The legislature may pass retrospective statutes affecting remedies only. Qoffin v. Rich, 45 Maine, 507. No vested rights are affected, because none existed.
Read the full summary
On exceptions. The case is stated in the opinion. The legislature may pass retrospective statutes affecting remedies only. Qoffin v. Rich, 45 Maine, 507. No vested rights are affected, because none existed. No party can claim a vested right in the continuance of a special mode or procedure, or the perpetuation of any remedy or remedial process, which can be modified or abolished without impairing or taking away the right itself, when public policy, or obedience to justice demands a change. Rich v. Flanders, 39 N. H. 304. . A right cannot be considered as vested in a constitutional sense,…
1Opinion of the CourtWiswell, J.
On the fifth of September, 1892, the city council of the city of Belfast laid out a street in that city across the land of the petitioner and awarded him $500, as the damages sustained thereby.
Thestatutein force at that time, R. S., c. 18, § 18, as amended by chapter 359, Public Laws of 1885, provided, in substance, that any person aggrieved by the estimate of damages might have them determined by a written complaint to the Supreme Judicial Court, " returnable at the term thereof next to be held within the county where the laud lies after sixty days from the date of the laying out, alteration…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Campbell v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Kinsman v. City of CambridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bussey v. BishopSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
- Miller v. FallonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1936
- Board of County Commissioners v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Kansas · 1906
- Denny v. BeanOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- Mayor of Baltimore v. PerticoneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1937