Laconia v. Gilman
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Case, by the town of Laconia against Hiram Gilman, for building a stone wall in a highway, thereby obstructing the public travel, making the highway dangerous, depriving the town of their rights and easements therein, preventing the town from keeping it in a suitable con-o dition for the public use, and compelling the town to remove a part of the wall at great expense. The defendant demurred. The declaration may be referred to as part of the case.
Read the full summary
Case, by the town of Laconia against Hiram Gilman, for building a stone wall in a highway, thereby obstructing the public travel, making the highway dangerous, depriving the town of their rights and easements therein, preventing the town from keeping it in a suitable con-o dition for the public use, and compelling the town to remove a part of the wall at great expense. The defendant demurred. The declaration may be referred to as part of the case. The only statute on which this action would seem to have any foundation is sec. 7, ch. 70, Gen. Stats., which is as follows: “If any person shall…
1Concurrence
It appears to me that the cases of Troy v. Cheshire R. R. Co., 23 N.H. 83, and Hooksett v. Company, 44 N.H. 105, are in point, and decisive that this action can be maintained.
LADD, J., concurred.
Demurrer overruled.
"For redress whereof:
"Be it enacted by His Excellency the Governor, Council, and Representatives, convened in General Assembly, and by the authority of the same, That henceforth no edifice, building, or fence whatever shall be raised, erected, built, or set up in, upon, or over any of the said roads, highways, streets, lanes, or alleys within this province, or any part of any of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Town of Troy v. Cheshire Rail RoadSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1851
- Hooksett v. Amoskeag Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860