Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-10-29
FROM LAW COURT.
Rescript in Case Of Googin Versus City
of Lewiston.

! The law court. Monday handed down
a rcscript in the Androscoggin County
| case of Melvin J.Googin versus the city
of Lewiston. giving judgment for tho
; plaintiff.
| The receipt, drawn by Justice Say
age is as follows:
| |. When tn" municipal authorities in
| tn" process of repairing Il public sewer
| stop Up the PIP" OF one who has law
! fully connected with il so that il fills
| and bursts. the municipality is li;,bio
! for the damage occasinned thereby
> TIL" power and duty to lay out.
| make. maintain and repair common
| sewers in thu city Of Lewiston is vested
| tv statute in til" city council
3 The special statute governing tho
construction nf :: Nfrg il Lewiston does
not require petition ~, a ,,,e-rcGlt;-
sit" to til" LAYING out Of Il sewer The
city council car act Of It's own motion
I. The city ordinance to the effect
that the mayer AMI aldermen Shall in
no case rrncr,d t" construct Il sewer
!ntii an appropriation therefor shall
have irt mad" ~ the city council is
not HrriicaialH III tia CAS-" of Il sewer
conStru' ted ly til" city council Itself.
). III" SIrii'rr provision in T.. S G. Il
sec. is not 'ippli";bln III the cas-" of Il
sewer constructed many years before
its enactment. as WAS the one in uIlcs-
ton in this case
q. AI order of the city council that
the sewer on Bate; street b" continued
80 Walnut street" is sufficiently definite
IS to The tnrmini. ono cGd being the
point where, the sewer then existing on
P"tcs street ended. aud the other being
Walnut street.
Z. I'aroI eVilen"" il; admissible 20 To-
cate nn III" face of the earth the termi-
III which We" fixed by the record, and
to show that tie sever constructed I'M
DIR such IN order if the one nov COM
planned of.
s. Record evidence of the concurrent
action of til" two boards of the CITY
council Of Lewiston is essential in
-,hnwin., tn" laying ont nf a sewer But
he ser ar:tte rcrnr,! of the common
council is not Indispensable in showing
The concurrent action Of that board
Whec the city records. kept by the city
clerk. who i: also tho recording: officer
of the l ard OF .,l,l@rIncn. show that the
order tor ihc construction % a scwc,
" - 'ISStli IN Tue !h'dft "a GlipEDit II
and srnt down." and later. that the
order ''canr NJ. passed in concurrence"
II Is Sufficient. Tn" city clerks record
is adIui: Sibie to show the coucllrrcn;
action of the common council.
.. I'nGcr Ctanttr 2;:3 Of the Privat"
and Special Laws of 1903. tho BOARD Of
Public Works for the city OF Lewiston
has = II the PAYERS and il charge Il with
I'll the dutif s relative to the cOnStrUc-
ton. maintenance. care and control OF
sewers in that city. which were pre-
vouSlv conftrr. Il or imposed upon the
city council:
Held, that the city is answerabIc in
damages for injuries caused by the
want OF proper maintenance OF repair of
tho public sewers; 10y the Board OF Pub
lie Works. the same as it would be if
tn" city council. or any other municipal
agency. WAS charged with the duty of
their maintenance and repair.
Judgment for the plaintiff for S12994
and interest from the date of thn writ