Town of Hay River v. Town of Sherman
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dunn Count}’’. This action was commenced, October 26, 1881, to recover the sum of $158.79 for the care and keeping of a pauper whose legal settlement was alleged to be in the defendant town. On the 7th of April, 1868, townships 29 and 30, North, of range 13, West, in Dunn county were organized and created a town, known as the town of Sherman.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Dunn Count}’’. This action was commenced, October 26, 1881, to recover the sum of $158.79 for the care and keeping of a pauper whose legal settlement was alleged to be in the defendant town. On the 7th of April, 1868, townships 29 and 30, North, of range 13, West, in Dunn county were organized and created a town, known as the town of Sherman. On the 28th of June, 1879, said town ivas divided, the division taking effect April 6, 1880, and by such division the north half thereof, being said township 30, became the town of Hay River, the plaintiff herein, and…
1Opinion of the CourtCassoday, J.
The pauper having acquired a legal settlement in the original town, there can be no doubt but'what it became the dutjr of that town to support and maintain him down to the time of the division, and, in case of failure, that town was liable therefor. Such duty and liability, however, were upon the whole town, and not exclusively upon any fraction of it." Such legal settlement was in the original town as a whole, and not only in a fractional portion of it. The pauper had, therefore, in view of the statutes, a legal settlement in that portion of the original town which became the plaintiff town,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hemmi v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Ashton v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
- Peterson v. Town of EmardvilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- City of Madison v. State Department of Public WelfareWisconsin Supreme Court · 1953