Pittsburg v. Tabor
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Debt, on a collector’s bond. Facts found by a referee. The only matters in controversy were a tax against Ross & Leavitt, a tax against R. E. Peabody & Co., and a claim of ten per cent, interest after December 1, 1876, on uncollected taxes and taxes collected and not paid over to the town. As to the Peabody tax, the collector was negligent. He could have collected it by the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, such as he was bound to exercise in his office.
Read the full summary
Debt, on a collector’s bond. Facts found by a referee. The only matters in controversy were a tax against Ross & Leavitt, a tax against R. E. Peabody & Co., and a claim of ten per cent, interest after December 1, 1876, on uncollected taxes and taxes collected and not paid over to the town. As to the Peabody tax, the collector was negligent. He could have collected it by the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, such as he was bound to exercise in his office. He was not guilty of bad faith. As to the Ross & Leavitt tax, he was guilty of no negligence or misconduct in not collecting it.…
1Opinion of the CourtStanley, J.
The collector is liable for his negligence, which caused the loss of the Peabody tax, not because he has collected it, but because he has unreasonably neglected to 'do so. It was demanded of him April 1, 1879, and the interest should be reckoned from that time. On this question the case does not stand as if it had been collected and not paid over. When collected, it is the duty of the collector to pay it over on or before the first Saturday of the month following its collection. Laws of 1874, c. 85, s. 9; G. L., c. 40, s. 1. Formerly the collector was only liable when he had unreasonably…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Northumberland v. CobleighSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879