Inhabitants of Livermore v. Inhabitants of Phillips
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Report from Nisi Prius, Wells, J., presiding. Assumpsit, for supporting an illegitimate pauper child whose mother, at the time of its birth, March 8, 1831, resided and had a legal settlement in the town of Berlin.
Read the full summary
On Report from Nisi Prius, Wells, J., presiding. Assumpsit, for supporting an illegitimate pauper child whose mother, at the time of its birth, March 8, 1831, resided and had a legal settlement in the town of Berlin. In the fall of the same year, the mother, with the child, removed to Phillips, and continued to reside there until 1847 or 1848. By an Act of March 17, 1842, a portion of Berlin was “ set off from Berlin and annexed to and made a part of the town of Phillips;” and as to the residue of Berlin, the Act of its incorporation was repealed. The town of Phillips was authorized, in the…
1Opinion of the CourtSi-iepley, C. J.
— Whether the pauper had a legal settlement in the town of Phillips must depend upon the construction of the Act approved on March 17, 184-2, by which the former town of Berlin was annihilated without any provision made for the future support of its paupers.
*187If the former town of Berlin be considered as divided, as well as annihilated by the Act, the settlement of the pauper was thereby transferred to the town of Phillips, by the first clause of the statute, c. 32, § 1, mode 4. If it be not considered as divided, and that part of it united with the town of Phillips be regarded as an “…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Inhabitants of Groton v. Inhabitants of ShirleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1810
3Cited by1 opinion
- Seabright v. SeabrightWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1886