County of Coos v. Berlin
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, to recover for the support of a pauper, who the plaintiff claimed had a settlement in Berlin. It appeared that the pauper owned-certain real estate in Berlin, and that a mortgage thereof had been executed by her and was in process of foreclosure in 1912. Conditional judgment was given in December, and in March, 1913, the mortgagee paid the taxes for 1912. If this payment is to be treated as made by the mortgagor, she had a settlement in Berlin, otherwise she had…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, to recover for the support of a pauper, who the plaintiff claimed had a settlement in Berlin. It appeared that the pauper owned-certain real estate in Berlin, and that a mortgage thereof had been executed by her and was in process of foreclosure in 1912. Conditional judgment was given in December, and in March, 1913, the mortgagee paid the taxes for 1912. If this payment is to be treated as made by the mortgagor, she had a settlement in Berlin, otherwise she had no settlement. In the superior court, Branch, J., found for the plaintiff,- and transferred the case from the April term,…
1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, J.
It is claimed that the pauper gained a settlement under the statute which provides that “Any maiden woman of the age of twenty-one years who shall have resided in any town in this state seven years in succession, shall have paid all taxes legally assessed during that term, or four years on any real estate, shall thereby gain a settlement in such town.” Laws 1911, c. 172, s. 1. While this statute differs from the earlier one as to the amount of property the pauper must have possessed and the period during which taxes must have been paid, the requirement that all taxes assessed must have been…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Weare v. DeeringSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1880
- Weare v. DeeringSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1877