Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1876

Barbour v. City of Ellsworth

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · Decided December 22, 1876 · Appleton, Barrows, Dickerson, Peters, Virgin, Walton

67 Me. 294; 1876 Me. LEXIS 1

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Creier v. Fitzwilliam (N.H. 1912)
City of Denver v. Porter (8th Cir. 1903)
Nicholson v. City of Detroit (Mich. 1902)
West Virginia & P. R. v. Harrison County Court (W. Va. 1899)
Esberg Cigar Co. v. City of Portland (Or. 1899)
Kelley v. Cook (R.I. 1898)
Gilboy v. City of Detroit (Mich. 1897)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Dickerson, J.

This case is not distinguishable in'principle from Mitchell v. Rockland, 52 Maine, 118, and the more recent cases of Brown et ux. v. Einalhaven, 65 Maine, 402, and Lynde v. Rockland, 66 Maine, 309.

It has been held in these and other analogous cases that the relation of master and servant, and principal and agent, does not obtain between municipal corporations and their officers, so as to render the former liable at common law for the torts of the latter committed under color of their official authority; and there is no statute creating such liability in the case at bar. Small v. Dan ville, 51 Maine, 359, 361.

The tortious acts complained of by the plaintiff, if done at all, *295having been committed by the municipal officers of the defendant town in the course of their employment, and under color of their offical authority, it is not liable therefor. The plaintiff’s remedy, if any he has, is against the individuals who did the damage. Newell v. Ayer, 32 Maine, 334.

Plaintiff nonsuit.

Appleton, C. J., Walton, Barrows, Virgin and Peters, J J., concurred.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.