Daily Kennebec journal., 1901-12-13

Other rescripts were handed down as
| follows:
Pitcataquis county Robert Allison vs.
Ira f. Hobbs. and others. Rescript by
Wiswel {. J.
| l. Where several persons Jointly COM
nit "A tort. the person injured has his
election TO sue all or any of the joint
tortfeasors. and in an action against one
or more may recover the damages caused
by all jointly.
! >. Persons who act separately and in
dependently, each causing a separate and
distinct injury, cannot be sled jointly
even though the injuries may have been
precisely similar in character and inflict-
cd at the same moment. Ye; if such per
sons acting Independently, by their sew
a single injury. each beng sufficient to
have caused the whole, and IL is impos-
*ible to distinguish the portions of in
jury caused by each. they are then join:
tortfeasors within the rule. and may be
sued either jointly or scverally at thu.
election of the plaintiff. and in such an
action against one or more the whole,
damag ge may be recovered.
5. The defendants, as assessors OF the
town of Milo for 1898, assessed a pol tax
against the plaintiff as an inhabitant of
| that town. On June l6 1899. the plaintiff
was arrested for nom payment of the tax
| by the collector upon warrant issued BY
the defendants and taken to the Jail in
! Bangor. The plaintiff claimed that he
was not an inhabitant Of Milo that year
! that consequently he was not liable TO
be- assessed for 4 poll tax therein, and
that his arrest was Illegal. Before his
commitment to Jail, in orGer TO prevent
such commitment and relieve himself
from arrest. he paid the collector the tax
ana the costs of his arrest. In an action
of trespass for the Illegal arrest the
jury found Tor the plaintiff and the only
question presented by the defendants
exceptions is as to an instruction upon
the question of damages
\ poll tax had also been assessed
against the plaintiff for 1891 by the as
SCISSORS of Milo. but not these defendants
ana for the non-payment of it. the plain
I'M was arrested simultaneously by the
same collector of the tax of 1895. The
| plaintiff paid this tax to prevent his COM
mitnent to Jail at the same time he paid
tn" tax of IS9S.
II was claimed. in defence. that the
Plaintiff having been arrested simulta-
neously by the same collector upon botn
warrants the ,amageS should he divid
"d, and the defendants were liable for a
portion thereof.
Held: That the plaintiff. having been
Illegally arrested upon the warrant issued
ny the defendants. sustained no separate
and, in fact no additional injury because
OF his Illegal arrest at the same momen1
D.! the same person upon another tax
warrant issued by other assessors and
continued concurrently with the other
arrest, except as to the amount of money
which he was obliged to pay to free him
sell IRON arrest upon the 1897 tax war
been only the amount of the tax. was
expressly excluded by the instruction TO
the jury. as an eiemens Of damage.
exceptions overrued
Androscoggin county Cyrus A. Cas-
Wiswell, C. j
J. II is Il general rule of law that
Where the substantial ground of action
against an infant is contract. a party
lltH fE.s riy
intant liable. when he would not have
been in AN action of contract
:. Infants are Liable ror their torts
YET the form of action does not deter
nine their liability. and they cannot be
made liable when the cause of action
arises from contract. although the form
is eN delicter.
Exceptions overruled.
Somerset county. Eastman HathOrn
VS.. John Robinson and Sylvester j. Wal
Ton: trustee. Rescript by Wiswell. c. J.
The statute of 1897 c. 80. paragraph H.
ieitting to fraternal beneficiary organ
i2ations, provides that: The money or
other benefit, charity. relief, or aid. to be
paio provided or rendered by any cor
poration, association or society author
i@ed to do business under this act, and as
attachment by trustee. or other nrocess
and shall not be seized. taken or appro-
priated, or applied by any legal or euli.;-
apie process nor operation by law. to pay
any deDt or liability of a certificate hold
er, or any beneficiary thereof" Held
]. That under this statute money re-
ceeived by beneficiary from such organ
izatlon does not continue to be exempt
any longer from attachment. or seizure.
upon execution. after II mas come into
his possession.
:. The statute gives protection and en-
cmption only to money to be paid and
not TO money paid and in a debtors nos |
session. -
D., d Inc trainers of the statute may well |
pc presumed to have had good reason to
Know the probable construction of the |
statute, since they followed the Ian.
guage Of another statute similar in Of
feet that had been long before passed
upon by the court. and in which n de-
MED debtors claim of exemption OF |
pension money after the money had ac-
tuaily gene into the possession of the
pensioner
Exceptions overrulel.