Bartlett v. Crozier
New York Supreme Court
IN' ERROR, to the court of common pleas of the county 0f Washington. ° The defendant in érror brought an action of trespass on . . . r the case, in the court below against the plaintiff in error.
Read the full summary
IN' ERROR, to the court of common pleas of the county 0f Washington. ° The defendant in érror brought an action of trespass on . . . r the case, in the court below against the plaintiff in error. The declaration contained three counts which were substantially the same, and stated, that the defendant below was; on the 5th of April, 1814, duly elected an overseer of highways for the town of Salem, in the county of Washing* (on for district No. 14, in the said town, and took the 1 , ' oath prescribed by law, which was duly filed with the town clerk : that he undertook the execution of his…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
This is a writ of error to the common pleas of Washington; and the error relied on is, that the declaration contains no cause of action. The declaration sets forth, in substance, that Bartlett was duly chosen and qualified, according to law, an overseer of highways, for district number fourteen in the town of Salem, and took upon him the office ; that disregarding his duty in that behalf, and wholly neglecting the same, he wilfully suffered a certain bridge in said district, and on a public highway therein, to be and remain, for the space of three months, broken, dangerous, and unfit to be…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Hill v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Pennsylvania & Ohio Canal Co. v. GrahamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Commissioners of Jefferson County v. LinebergerMontana Supreme Court · 1878
- Lynn v. AdamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1850
- Lampert v. Laclede Gas-Light Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1883
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.