Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-04-26
RESCRIPTSFR0M
THE LAW COURT

I'LL Inv VVVIa1
Rescripts have been received from the
law court at the clerk of courts Office,
in the following cases; In the Washing
ton county case of Edward Z. Talbot
Admr. VS.. James E. Hathaway and Trs.
in the Oxford county case of L. O.
Lesieur VS.. Inhabitants of Rumford the
Lincoln county case Of First National
Bank Of Boothbay VS.. Fred c. Blake ct
ais; and in the Cumberland county case
Of Forgioni and Romano Co. ct al vs.
Durham and Morrill, Co.
Rescripts in the first two cases are
given below, in the Lincoln county case
of First National Bank of Boothbay VS.
Fred c. Glake ct ais, the conclusion OF
the court Is that the verdict in favor OF
Eugene Murray is not to be disturbed
but the verdict in favor of Thomas j
Blossom is to be set aside and a new
trial granted to the plaintiff as to him
only. In the Cumberland county case
the contention of the defendant is upheld
and judgment was rendered for the
plaintiffs for the balance of $685.
In the Oxford county case of L. O.
Lesieur VS.. Inhabitants of Rumford, in
which the plaintiff sued for services per-
formed in attending and caring for one
infected with smallpox and placed in
quarantine. 1t was held that as the con-
tract made with the board of health of
which the plaintiff was a member was
against public policy and the verdict OF
the lower court for the defendant was
allowed to stand. The rescript follows
Oxford County.
L. O. Lesieur VS.. Inhabitants of Rum.
ford.
Rescript, King, ].
Action of assumpsit to recover for ser
vices performed in attending and caring
for one infected with smallpox and
placed in quarantine. The plaintiff relied
solely on an express contract made with
him by the board of health of Rumford
of which board he was a member, where.
by he was to perform the particular ser.
vice at the specified price of $40 per day
At the close of the evidence for the
plaintiff non-suit was ordered. Held:
l. That the evidence would have JUST
fled the jury in finding that the express
contract was made as alleged.
2. That it was the duty of the plain
tiff to perform the services sued for ir
his capacity as town physician" HI.
contract with the town as town physi
clan was to take care "of the towr
paupers" so far as they required medica
aid. There Is no evidence that the per
son whom the plaintiff did care for wa.
pauper at the time he became infected
with this contagious disease. And the
statutes expressly provide that person:
who become needy and are assisted Will,
| in quarantine on account of a contagiou.
disease shall not ''be considered a pau
per-"
3. One acting in a fiduciary relation
to others is requested to exercise perfec
fidelity to his trust, and the law, to pre-
vent the neglect of such fidelity, and t,
guard against any temptation to serv,
his own interests to the prejudice of hi.
principals, disables him from makins
| any contract with himself binding on hi
principal.
4. The invalidity Of a contract entered
into in violation of this rule does no
necessarily depend upon whether tn,
hduciary intended to obtain an advan
tage to himself. but rather upon whethe
1t affords him the opportunity, and sub
Jects him to the temptation, to obtail
such advantage. The test Is not whether
harm to the public welfare has in fac
resulted from the contract, but whether
its tendency is that such harm will re
suit.
5. Local boards of health are author
lied. and 1t Is their duty, when any per
| son is infected with a disease or sickness.
dangerous to the public health, to pro
vide for the safety of the inhabitants, a.
they think best, by removing him to
separate house, If it can be done withou
great danger to his health, and by pro
viding nurses, and other assistants ant
necessaries for such person, all the ex
penses thus incurred to be at his charge
or that Of his parent or master, if able
otherwise at the expense Of the towr
where the person fell sick II he resides
there, but If he does not reside there thu
board Of health has power to determine
how much Of the expenses shall be borne
by that town and how much by the towr
Of his settlement.
8. In making provisions for the case Of
a person placed in quarantine the mem.
beers Of the board Of health act in a f1du.
ciary capacity. They are public officers
clothed by the legislature with power to
incur expenses for others to pay. and the
law requires Of them perfect fidelity in
the exercise Of that power. and whatever
has tendency to prevent their exercise
Of such fidelity il contrary to the policy
Of the law. and should not be recognized
as lawful and enforceable through the
administration Of the law.
Z. The plaintiffs personal interest in
making the contract. and in its perform
ance. was antagonistic to a proper per-
Torrance Of his duties as a member OF
the board Of health. It placed him in a