Barbour v. City of Ellsworth
James M. Barbour v. City of Ellsworth
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
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, *295 having 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.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.