Town of New Haven v. Town of Middlebury
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit for money expended in the support of a pauper. The case came into the County Court upon an appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, and was heard at the June term, 1890, Taft, J., presiding, upon an agreed statement of facts. Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepts.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money expended in the support of a pauper. The case came into the County Court upon an appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, and was heard at the June term, 1890, Taft, J., presiding, upon an agreed statement of facts. Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepts. The agreed statement was as follows : “ The alleged pauper, Charles Bartlett, resided in Middle-bury, maintaining himself and family for nine years before and up to the 18th of July in the year 1886, when he purchased and took a deed in fee of a small house or shanty in New Haven, with the land on…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
ROSS, Ch. J.
From the agreed case it appears that the alleged pauper, Charles Bartlett, before July 18, 1886, had resided in Middlebury for more than three consecutive years maintaining himself and family. At that date he moved with his family into the town of New Haven and has continued to reside there. In November, 1888, he applied to the overseer of the poor of New Haven for assistance, and was aided by him. The town of New Haven treated him as a transient pauper, and duly notified the town of Middlebury, and, in this suit, seeks to recover for the…
2Cited by11 opinions
- St. Albans Hospital v. City of St. AlbansSupreme Court of Vermont · 1935
- Town of Cabot v. Town of St. JohnsburySupreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- The Leontios TeryazosDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1942
- City of Montpelier v. Town of ElmoreSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899
- McCarty v. ThorntonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1917
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.