Legal Opinion

City of Haverhill v. City of Marlborough

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 4, 1905PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Contract, under R. L. c. 75, §§ 54, 57, for expenses incurred by the board of health of the city of Haverhill in making the provision required by law for Geneva Wright and Charles Wright, persons infected with the smallpox, having a legal settlement in the city of Marlborough. Writ dated July 28, 1902. In the Superior Court the case was heard by jHolmes, J., without a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts.

Read the full summary

Contract, under R. L. c. 75, §§ 54, 57, for expenses incurred by the board of health of the city of Haverhill in making the provision required by law for Geneva Wright and Charles Wright, persons infected with the smallpox, having a legal settlement in the city of Marlborough. Writ dated July 28, 1902. In the Superior Court the case was heard by jHolmes, J., without a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts. The judge ruled that the reasonable expenses incurred for Geneva and Charles Wright must be limited to items one to six inclusive of the plaintiff’s declaration, and that $200 paid the…

1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.

The expenses for which repayment is sought were incurred by the city of Haverhill in consequence of the falling ill with smallpox within its limits of two persons whose settlement was in Marlborough. The expenses were incurred between February 27,1902, and the fifth day of the following April. In the lower court the case was tried without a jury upon the pleadings and an agreed statement of facts, and a finding was made for the plaintiff in respect of a part only of the items declared for. Both parties appealed to this court, and the defendant also filed a bill of exceptions. The agreed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Murray v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
  2. Rand v. HansonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  3. Norton v. Inhabitants of BrooklineMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
  4. Commonwealth v. Inhabitants of SudburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  2. Royal Paper Box Co. v. Munro & Church Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  3. Commissioner of Banks v. Chase Securities Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  4. American Congregational Ass'n v. AbbotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
  5. City of Somerville v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API