Legal Opinion

Inhabitants of Camden v. Camden Village Corp.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided December 1, 1885PublishedCited by 13 opinions

On report upon agreed statement of facts. The opinion states the case and material facts. Revised Statutes, c. 6, § 2, expressly declares that "all real: property within the state is subject to taxation, as hereinafter-provided.” Section 6, declares what the exceptions shall he, specifically naming them. The real estate of subordinate municipal corporations is not excepted. In this case the rule, expressiounius exelusio alterius, applies. Nothing is left to construction.

Read the full summary

On report upon agreed statement of facts. The opinion states the case and material facts. Revised Statutes, c. 6, § 2, expressly declares that "all real: property within the state is subject to taxation, as hereinafter-provided.” Section 6, declares what the exceptions shall he, specifically naming them. The real estate of subordinate municipal corporations is not excepted. In this case the rule, expressiounius exelusio alterius, applies. Nothing is left to construction. The legislature has declared what exceptions shall be made by the assessors; and they cannot be enlarged. Counsel contended…

1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.

The defendant corporation, by special authority from the legislature, together with other powers and privileges particularly enumerated in the act of incorporation, was authorized to build a village hall at a cost of not more than eight thousand dollars. Thereafter a lot was purchased and a building erected thereon by the defendants, known as " Meguntieook Hall.” This building is sixty feet long, fifty feet wide, and two stories high. The upper portion is finished into a hall with galleries, platform and two small ante-rooms. The lower story contains a hall somewhat smaller than the one…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. National Bank v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  2. Inhabitants of Worcester County v. Mayor of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
  3. People v. Doe G. 1,034California Supreme Court · 1868
  4. Bouton v. Board of SupervisorsIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Loring & Co. v. SmallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1878

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pikes Peak Power Co. v. City of Colorado SpringsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
  2. Morris v. GossSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1951
  3. Bell v. City of PlattevilleWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Canaan v. Enfield Village Fire DistrictSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1908
  5. Edwards & Walsh Construction Co. v. Jasper CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1902

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API