 Commonwealth that no private action, unless authorized by express statute, can be maintained against a city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon it by law for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which the corporation receives...  The New York Supplement - Page 6981921Full view - About this book
 | Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1878 - 696 pages
...Commonwealth, that no private action, unless authorized by express statute, can be maintained against a city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon...which the corporation receives no profit or advantage. But, it having been suggested at the argument that the recent opinions of the Supreme Court of the... | |
 | Law - 1878 - 560 pages
...the ground that no private action, unless authorized by express statute, can be maintained against a city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon...which the corporation receives no profit or advantage. The question has most commonly arisen in actions for defects in highways and bridges by reason of which... | |
 | Isaac Grant Thompson - Law reports, digests, etc - 1878 - 864 pages
...expressly authorized by statute, can be maintained against a city MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — Continued. for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon it by law for the benefit oJ the public, and from the performance of which the corporation receives no profit or advantage. HiUv.... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1898 - 1132 pages
...even If the statute imposed the duty to provide a suitable lockup upon the town, the duty being one for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which the town receives no corporate benefit or advantage, the plaintiff's action, In the absence of a statute... | |
 | Isaac Grant Thompson - Law reports, digests, etc - 1886 - 968 pages
...for the performance of a duty which under the authority of the statute the city of Boston has assumed for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which no profit or advantage is derived either by the trustees or the city. The trustees as a corporation... | |
 | John T. Cook - Law reports, digests, etc - 1885 - 874 pages
...the performance of a duty which, under the authority of the statute, the city of Boston has assumed for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which no profit or advantage is received either by the trustees or the city. The trustees are no more liable... | |
 | Abraham Clark Freeman - Law reports, digests, etc - 1890 - 1000 pages
...949-951, 953-955. No private action, in the absence of a statute giving it, can be maintained against a city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon...which the corporation receives no profit or advantage: Hill v. Boston, 122 Mass. 344; 23 Am. Rep. 332, and cases cited; 2 Dillon on Municipal Corporations,... | |
 | John Forrest Dillon - Corporation law - 1890 - 894 pages
...or city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon it as the agent of the public, by general laws for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which the corporation receives no profit or special advantage. Whether the result would have been different if the duty in question had been imposed... | |
 | John Forrest Dillon - Corporation law - 1890 - 922 pages
...or city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon it as the agent of the public, by general laws for the benefit of the public, and from the performance of which the corporation receives no profit or special advantage. Whether the result would have been different if the duty in question had been imposed... | |
 | New Brunswick. Supreme Court, Ward Chipman, John Campbell Allen, Allen Otty Earle, Thomas Carleton Allen, George F. S. Berton, David Shank Kerr, George B. Seely, James Hannay, William Pugsley, Arthur I. Trueman, George Wheelock Burbidge, George W. Allen, John L. Carleton, William Henry Harrison, Ernest Doiron, Douglas King Hazen - Law reports, digests, etc - 1892 - 808 pages
...was held that no private action, unless authorized by express statute, could be maintained against & city for the neglect of a public duty imposed upon...benefit of the public, and from the performance of XXIX.] NEW BRUNSWICK REPORTS. v. OP MOMTON. which the corporation received no profit or advantage.... | |
| |
