Ruggles v. Inhabitants of Nantucket
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Assumpsit to recover compensation for a dwelling-house alleged to have been demolished by order of the firewards, in July, 1846, and also for certain goods and furniture, books, medicines, and medical apparatus, alleged to have been in the dwelling-house. The declaration avers that by means of the destruction of the house and furniture, &c.,. the fire was stopped.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit to recover compensation for a dwelling-house alleged to have been demolished by order of the firewards, in July, 1846, and also for certain goods and furniture, books, medicines, and medical apparatus, alleged to have been in the dwelling-house. The declaration avers that by means of the destruction of the house and furniture, &c.,. the fire was stopped. At the trial, in this court, before Bigelow, J. the plaintiff offered in proof of title to the dwelling-house, the deposition of Philip H. Folger, by which it appeared that the witness acted as agent of Mrs. Elizabeth Barker, in…
1Opinion of the CourtBigelow, J.
The defendants can be held responsible m this case solely under Rev. Sts. c. 18, §§ 4, 7, by which it is provided that towns shall be liable' in certain cases for the value of buildings which are “ pulled down or demolished, in order to prevent the further spreading of a fire.” Unless, therefore, the evidence offered by the plaintiff at the trial orings his case within these provisions, he cannot recover i» *436this action. Taylor v. Plymouth, 8 Met. 465. Upon looking at the evidence, it is clearly insufficient to establish two essential facts, which lie at the foundation of the plaintiff’s…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Fifth StreetSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903