From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Berlin c. Ass'n v. Mayor of Berlin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Coos
Jun 28, 1934
87 N.H. 80 (N.H. 1934)

Opinion

Decided June 28, 1934.

Taxpayers may bring suit or intervene and thereafter carry on or defend a proceeding to which the municipality is a party when illegal action to their detriment is threatened or committed by the municipality. But a taxpayers' petition to so intervene on the ground of fraud will be dismissed unless the essential details of the fraud alleged are specified in the petition and established upon hearing.

PETITION, by taxpayers of Berlin, for leave to prosecute an action brought by the city against a surety company, one of the defendants, upon its bond to secure the city for its tax-collector's liability. A voluntary nonsuit has been entered in the action in pursuance of a vote of the city government.

The court granted the petition on terms and the surety company excepted. Transferred by Sawyer, C. J.

Frank P. Blais and Arthur J. Bergeron (Mr. Bergeron orally), for the plaintiffs.

Irving A. Hinkley (by brief), for the surety company.


The petition alleges that the city government acted fraudulently in voting to give up further prosecution of the action. The general principle is that while taxpayers of a municipality may bring suit or intervene and thereafter carry on or defend the proceeding when illegal action to their detriment is threatened or committed by the municipality (Brown v. Marsh, 21 N.H. 81; Merrill v. Plainfield, 45 N.H. 126; Brown v. Concord, 56 N.H. 375; Sherburne v. Portsmouth, 72 N.H. 539; Blood v. Company, 68 N.H. 340), yet the court may not permit their participation in a proceeding in respect to conduct of a municipality's officers within their authority (Clough v. Verrette, 79 N.H. 356, 359). Here the vote was legal unless there was fraud. Fraud is alleged but the facts and matters claimed to constitute it are not set forth in the petition, as they should be. Lyme v. Allen, 51 N.H. 242, 244; Eastman v. Thayer, 60 N.H. 408, 413; Blood v. Company, supra. The petition should be dismissed unless after amendment specifying the essential details of the fraud, they are upon hearing found.

Case discharged.

All concurred.


Summaries of

Berlin c. Ass'n v. Mayor of Berlin

Supreme Court of New Hampshire Coos
Jun 28, 1934
87 N.H. 80 (N.H. 1934)
Case details for

Berlin c. Ass'n v. Mayor of Berlin

Case Details

Full title:BERLIN TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION a. v. THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BERLIN a

Court:Supreme Court of New Hampshire Coos

Date published: Jun 28, 1934

Citations

87 N.H. 80 (N.H. 1934)
173 A. 810

Citing Cases

Patey v. Peaslee

Hilliard v. Baldwin, 76 N.H. 142, 144. The petition fails to state any other cause which would prevent…

Moulton v. Beals

This being the selectmen's duty prescribed by statute, the voters cannot delegate it to others…