Furbish v. County Commissioners
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Repobt. These two cases,' heard together and depending on the same facts, were petitions for mandamus. The Maine Water Company, the party in interest, assumed the defense of both actions. By agreement of the parties the cases were reported to the law court for argument and determination, — the petitions to be taken as the alternative writs and returns thereto. The cases appear in the opinion.
Read the full summary
On Repobt. These two cases,' heard together and depending on the same facts, were petitions for mandamus. The Maine Water Company, the party in interest, assumed the defense of both actions. By agreement of the parties the cases were reported to the law court for argument and determination, — the petitions to be taken as the alternative writs and returns thereto. The cases appear in the opinion. Where mandamus is the only process which will yield to the party the precise remedy which the statute has given him, and where the act is not discretionary, and the debt is plain, then mandamus will…
1Opinion of the CourtFogler, J.
Petitions for mandamus in which the petitioners pray that a writ of mandamus issue to the county commissioners of Kennebec County commanding them to issue wai’rants of distress against the Maine Water Company and its property to enforce payment of the sums awarded by the commissioners to the petitioners respectively for real estate taken by the company as for public use. The Water Company comes in as a defendant in interest. The cases were heard together, the rights of the respective parties depending upon the same facts.
The Maine Water Company is the successor of the Waterville Water Company…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Flanders v. Town of MerrimackWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- People Ex Rel. Gas-Light Co. v. . Common CouncilNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Darmstaetter v. MoloneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Imbescheid v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Matter of Alter'g, Etc., Main St., Sing SingNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. Environmental Improvement CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1973
- Edwards v. City of CheyenneWyoming Supreme Court · 1911
- Chequinn Corporation v. MullenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1963
- State v. FaheyNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1924
- Perkins v. WinslowSuperior Court of Delaware · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.