Kentucky Employees Retirement Systems

<p>ExceptioNS from the Court of Common Pleas, Perham J. presiding.</p> <p>The action was assumpsit, brought in the name of George W. Darling, and Joshua Wilkinson, as surviving members of a fish committee, consisting of three, chosen by the town of Sullivan in pursuance of the statute of February 28, 1833, entitled, “An act to prevent the destruction of fish in the town of Sullivan,” for money jointly expended, against the defendants as owners of the mill referred to in the statute. Wilkinson appeared by his counsel, and filed a motion, in which lie set forth that he had no claim against the defendants, having been employed and paid by the town of Sullivan, that the suit was commenced without his knowledge, and moved that the action be discontinued. The counsel for the defendants insisted that the action for that cause ought not to he suffered to proceed further, and that the Court ought to order a nonsuit. The counsel for the plaintiff offered to indemnify Wilkinson against any costs in consequence of that action, and opposed the motion to dismiss the action. The Court overruled the motion,- and permitted the action to stand for trial. The jury found for the plaintiffs, and the defendants filed exceptions.</p> <p>The powers given by statute to a fish committee, like this, can be exercised only by a majority. Stephenson v. Gooch, 7 Greenl. 152. If a majority acted in incurring the expenses, they did not in commending the action. One of the two disclaims the suit, and it ought to have been dismissed.</p> <p>The action should have been brought by Darling alone. The payment to Wilkinson operated as a severance of the cause of action, as did also the death of the other member of the committee.</p> <p>The fifth section of the act, referred to in the report, authorizes the committee, as such, to recover the money expended, in an action of assumpsit. The action must be brought, by the terms of the act, by the committee in their official character. All acted in incurring th