Inhabitants of Newtown v. Inhabitants of Danbury
Supreme Court of Connecticut
THIS was an action of assumpsit, to recover the sum of 75 dollars, expended by the plaintifls, for the necessary support of Sally Clark, the wife oí Adam S. Clark.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, to recover the sum of 75 dollars, expended by the plaintifls, for the necessary support of Sally Clark, the wife oí Adam S. Clark. The declaration stated, that said Sally, being an inhabitant of the town of Danbury, having a legal settlement therein, providentially became poor, and incapable of supporting herself, and, having no relation of sufficient ability by law bound to support her, was cast upon the town of Newtown ; and the select-men thereof paid out for her boarding, washing, clothing and nur-iing, from the 1st of November, 1816, to the 1st of…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
This is an action of assumpsit, for necessary supplies, administered to Sally, the wife of Adam S. Clark, a settled inhabitant of Danbury.
*558Four objections have been made to the determination of the court below.
It is, in the first place, contended, that for want of jurisdiction, the superior court should, ex officio, have ordered the cause to be stricken from the docket, on the ground that the matter in demand did not exceed seventy dollars. The declaration avers, that supplies had been advanced to the pauper, ¿mountingto 75dollars; and the sum of 100 dollars is demanded in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Searight v. Calbraith Calbraith v. SearightSupreme Court of the United States · 1796
3Cited by13 opinions
- Condon v. Pomroy-GraceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Castagnola v. FatoolSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Bushnell v. ChurchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1843
- Holmquist v. SpinelliSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
- Griswold v. MatherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.