
    Bartlett v. Crosier, 17 J. R. 439.
    In S. Ct. 15 J. R. 520.
    
      Action ; Overseer of Highways ; Pleading.
    
    Action on the case against an overseer of highways for not repairing a bridge within his district, by reason of which the plaintiff’s horse fell through and broke his leg.
    The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff might sustain the action, it being alleged that the defendant had wilfully neglected to repair the bridge. That court also held that although the declaration ought to aver the commissioners of the town had provided materials and that the defendant had means to repair the bridge, yet the omission was cured after verdict by the common law intendment. But on error
    The Court of Errors held that, if any private action could be sustained, it could not be against the overseer, but against the commissioners of highways for such an injury. Kent, Chancellor, in delivering the opinion of the court, seems to intimate that the remedy for the party is to sue for the penalty imposed by the statute for each neglect or breach of duty.
   The judgment of the Supreme Court was reversed unanimously.  