TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Storer Post, No. 1, Grand Army of the Republic v. Page

Storer Post, No. 1, Grand Army of the Republic, v. Page & A.

Storer Post, No. 1, Grand Army of the Republic v. Page, 47 A. 264 (N.H. 1900)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Hampshire · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 5, 1900
Judges
Chase, Young
Citations
47 A. 26470 N.H. 280
Headnotes
Assumpsit, and not mandamus, is the proper remedy to enforce the payment of an appropriation made by a municipal corporation.
Summary
Petition, for a writ of mandamus, to compel the payment to the plaintiffs of an appropriation made by the city of Portsmouth “for decorating graves of soldiers and sailors.” Facts found.by the court. One half of the appropriation was paid to the General Gilman Marston Command of the Union Veterans’ Union, and one half was offered to -the plaintiffs, who claimed the whole under section 1, chapter 34, of the Laws of 1899. The petition was dismissed, subject to the plaintiffs’ exception.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Chase

Chase, J.

Mandamus is “ an extraordinary remedy granted only in cases where the usual modes of procedure and forms of remedy are powerless to afford relief.”

State v. Railroad, 62 N. H. 29, 34. This is not such a case. If the plaintiffs are entitled to the appropriation, they can recover it in an action of assumpsit against the city.

Hillsborough County v. Londonderry, 43 N. H. 451;

Jones v. Chester, 67 N. H. 191.

Exception overruled.

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

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1906: 119062026peak 1906 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State ex rel. Burg v. Milwaukee Medical College106 N.W. 116 (Wis. 1906)

Most recent

  1. State ex rel. Burg v. Milwaukee Medical College106 N.W. 116 (Wis. 1906)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Jones v. Chester, 29 A. 452 (N.H. 1892) 1
State ex rel. Chandler v. Manchester & Lawrence R.R., 62 N.H. 29 (1882) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list