Town of Clinton v. Town of Haddam
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit for supplies furnished a pauper; brought to the Superior Court in Middlesex County. Facts found by a committee and ease reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLoomis, J.
This action was brought to recover for supplies furnished one Henry T. Taylor, an alleged pauper belonging to the defendant town.
*85The argument for the plaintiff is two-fold—that the pauper in fact had a legal settlement in the defendant town, and, if not, that the defendant is estopped to deny the settlement by reason of certain concessions made by its selectmen.
The facts reported by the committee effectually dispose of the first claim. It was distinctly conceded by the plaintiff that the pauper had no settlement in the town of Haddam unless it was derived from his father, Warren Taylor, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Thrall v. LathropSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Inhabitants of Leicester v. Inhabitants of RehobothMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
3Cited by4 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Cass CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
- Lamenza v. SheltonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Central National Bank v. StoddardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Town of Bristol v. Town of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898