Rhode Island Society for Encouragement of Domestic Industry v. Town Council of Cranston

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Rhode Island Society for Encouragement of Domestic Industry v. Town Council of Cranston

44 A. 223, 21 R.I. 577, 1890 R.I. LEXIS 79

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedOctober 4, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 44 A. 223 (Rhode Island Society for Encouragement of Domestic Industry v. Town Council of Cranston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rhode Island Society for Encouragement of Domestic Industry v. Town Council of Cranston, 44 A. 223, 21 R.I. 577, 1890 R.I. LEXIS 79 (R.I. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

*578 (1) *577 The court, at the former hearing, in overruling the motion of the respondents to dismiss the petition, recognized the petitioner as a proper party to prosecute the same because of the allegation contained therein that the petitioner, the Cranston Print Works,. and Anthony Corcoran were the owners and occupants of the greater part of the land within 200 feet of the building and place for which *578 the license was requested, and as such, owners and occupants had filed'their objections with the town council to the granting of the petition. The testimony introduced by the respondents at the present hearing shows that said petitioner, said Print Works, and said Corcoran do not own the greater part of the land within said 200 feet. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the petitioner cannot be regarded as a proper party to prosecute the petition any more than any other person who might see fit to object to the granting of the license could be so regarded. The petition must, therefore, be dismissed.

Bradley & Angelí, for petitioner. George J. West and John Palmer, for respondent.

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

Per Curiam.

*578 (1) *577 The court, at the former hearing, in overruling the motion of the respondents to dismiss the petition, recognized the petitioner as a proper party to prosecute the same because of the allegation contained therein that the petitioner, the Cranston Print Works,. and Anthony Corcoran were the owners and occupants of the greater part of the land within 200 feet of the building and place for which *578 the license was requested, and as such, owners and occupants had filed'their objections with the town council to the granting of the petition. The testimony introduced by the respondents at the present hearing shows that said petitioner, said Print Works, and said Corcoran do not own the greater part of the land within said 200 feet. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the petitioner cannot be regarded as a proper party to prosecute the petition any more than any other person who might see fit to object to the granting of the license could be so regarded. The petition must, therefore, be dismissed.

Bradley & Angelí, for petitioner. George J. West and John Palmer, for respondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A. 223, 21 R.I. 577, 1890 R.I. LEXIS 79, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhode-island-society-for-encouragement-of-domestic-industry-v-town-council-ri-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack