Ex parte Dow
New York Supreme Court
S. Beardsley, moved for a mandamus to the Supervisors of Erie, commanding them to audit and allow Mr. Dozo’s account and disbursements, for medical attendance; upon Ellis and Davis, two paupers, haying no residence in this -it , c state. 1 hese expenses were incurred under an order ot a single Justice, made pursuant to the 25th section of the act for the relief and settlement of the poor, (1 R. L. 287-8.) And the objection was, that no previous adjudication by two justices…
Read the full summary
S. Beardsley, moved for a mandamus to the Supervisors of Erie, commanding them to audit and allow Mr. Dozo’s account and disbursements, for medical attendance; upon Ellis and Davis, two paupers, haying no residence in this -it , c state. 1 hese expenses were incurred under an order ot a single Justice, made pursuant to the 25th section of the act for the relief and settlement of the poor, (1 R. L. 287-8.) And the objection was, that no previous adjudication by two justices had been made, that the paupers were not settled in this state. The order of the Justice recited the matters, required by…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
In this case, the Overseer was applied to for relief, by certain paupers, not belonging to, nor settled in any town of this state. He, together with the Justice, makes the inquiry directed by the act. and an order is made, under which the expenses here sought to be reimbursed, were'incurred, and have been paid. The ground taken by the Supervisors, was, that there should have been a previous adjudication of two Justices, upon the question of settlement. This was not necessary. The statute commits this matter to a single Justice and Overseer. The Court will go so far as to intend that all…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Adams v. Supervisors of Columbia CountyNew York Supreme Court · 1811
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dunham v. New England Mut. Ins.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1868