Dunbar v. City of Boston
This text of 112 Mass. 75 (Dunbar v. City of Boston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
It is admitted that the taxes, to recover back which this suit is brought, were legally assessed and were due from the plaintiff to the defendant. The constable and deputy collector, to whom the warrant was committed for service, arrested the plaintiff, who thereupon paid the taxes under protest. The only ground upon which he seeks to maintain this suit is that such arrest was illegal.
We have not deemed it necessary to consider this question, because, if the arrest was illegal, the plaintiff cannot maintain this action. The constable and deputy collector, in serving the warrant, did not act as the servant or agent of the city, but as a public officer of the law. If he exceeded his authority, the remedy of the plaintiff is in a suit against him; but the city is not responsible, and the plaintiff cannot maintain an action against it for damages, nor to recover back the money paid. Buttrick v. Lowell, 1 Allen, 172. Kimball v. Boston, 1 Allen, 417. Rossire v. Boston, 4 Allen, 57. Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
112 Mass. 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunbar-v-city-of-boston-mass-1873.