Fournier v. Berlin
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtMarble, J.
Plaintiff’s counsel do not challenge the established doctrine that a municipal corporation is ordinarily immune from liability for injuries caused by the negligent performance of a governmental duty. Gilman v. Concord, 89 N. H. 182, 184, and cases cited. They contend, however, that the Sweden Street project was essentially a corporate rather than a governmental enterprise, since free labor and payment by the Federal Government to workmen who would otherwise have been on the city’s relief rolls must have induced the undertaking. They also argue that the city in quarrying and transporting the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Colwell v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1902
- City of Somerville v. City of WalthamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Schneider v. City of MenashaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Hafner v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cannata v. Town of DeerfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
- Reynolds v. NashuaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1943
- Day v. City of BerlinCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1946
- Ivory v. City of MontgomeryAlabama Court of Appeals · 1951