Yarter v. Flagg
Ora A. Yarter v. Dennis F. Flagg
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.
W. Allen, J.
The Pub. Sts. c. 99, §§ 1, 2, in giving an action of tort to a common informer to recover of the owner of a place in which property is lost by gaming treble the value thereof, provide for the recovery of a penalty; and the action does not survive against the representatives of the defendant, either at common law or by the Pub. Sts. e. 165, § 1.
The assumption on which the argument for the plaintiff is founded, that, prior to the General Statutes, the action to recover a like penalty survived because the form of the action was debt, is unwarranted. The earlier statutes, passed when debt was the common action for penalties, (St. 1793, c. 43, § 4; Rev. Sts. e. 118, § 42,) gave a qui tarn action of debt to recover a penalty, one half of which was for the use of the Commonwealth. The General Statutes, passed after the Practice Act (St. 1852, c. 312, § 2) had provided that tort should include all actions for penalties, prescribed the action of tort, and gave the whole penalty to the informer. St. 1785, a. 58. Rev. Sts. e. 50, § 12. St. 1837, o, 179. Gen. Sts. c. 85, § 1. Plainly neither action can survive against a defendant.
Exceptions overruled.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 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.