Churchill v. Town of West Fairlee
Supreme Court of Vermont
Indebitatus Assumpsit. The declaration was for work and labor, and for money paid, laid out and expended by the plaintiff for the defendants, at the defendants’ request, in the support. and maintenance of one Austin F. Churchill, who was described, in the declaration, as a pauper, having his legal settlement in said town of West Fairlee. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
Indebitatus Assumpsit. The declaration was for work and labor, and for money paid, laid out and expended by the plaintiff for the defendants, at the defendants’ request, in the support. and maintenance of one Austin F. Churchill, who was described, in the declaration, as a pauper, having his legal settlement in said town of West Fairlee. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury. On trial it appeared, from the evidence, that the said Austin F. Churchill was a son of the plaintiff, about thirty years of age, and resided in the family of his father, in West Fairlee, and that his legal…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Hebard, J.
The only question arises upon the construction of the first section of the statute, in relation to the liability of towns to support paupers. The statute is, that “Every town shall relieve and support all poor and indigent persons, lawfully settled therein, whenever they shall stand in need of relief.” The other part of the statute has defined what facts shall constitute a legal settlement; and the liability of towns, in that respect, must be determined by law. But *449whether the person applying needs relief depends upon a great variety of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Town of Chelsea v. Town of WashingtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1876
- St. Albans Hospital v. City of St. AlbansSupreme Court of Vermont · 1935