Quinn v. Portsmouth

10 A. 677, 64 N.H. 324
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedJune 5, 1887
StatusPublished

This text of 10 A. 677 (Quinn v. Portsmouth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Quinn v. Portsmouth, 10 A. 677, 64 N.H. 324 (N.H. 1887).

Opinion

Blodgett, J.

As to constables, police officers, and watchmen, the statute makes the power of removal commensurate with that of appointment. G. L., c. 46, s. 15. If, therefore, the plaintiff was lawfully appointed a police officer, constable, watchman, and patrolman by the committee on police, he was lawfully removed by that committee before the rendition of the services sought to be recovered in this action, and the vote of the aldermen to pay him for such services was the vote of a gratuity which does not bind the city; and if he was not lawfully appointed, his writ does *326 not allege any cause of action. Other questions need not be considered.

Judgment for the defendants.

Clark, J., did not sit: the others concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 A. 677, 64 N.H. 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/quinn-v-portsmouth-nh-1887.