Inhabitants of Shelburne v. Inhabitants of Buckland
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for supplies furnished to Lilia Hailey, John Hailey and Estella Hailey, in the years 1874,1875 and 1876. The case was submitted to the Superior Court on a statement of facts, of which all that need be stated was as follows : On March 81, 1876, the plaintiff gave the defendant the following notice: “ Shelburne Falls, Mass., March 31, 1876. To the overseers of the poor of the town of Buckland.
Read the full summary
Contract for supplies furnished to Lilia Hailey, John Hailey and Estella Hailey, in the years 1874,1875 and 1876. The case was submitted to the Superior Court on a statement of facts, of which all that need be stated was as follows : On March 81, 1876, the plaintiff gave the defendant the following notice: “ Shelburne Falls, Mass., March 31, 1876. To the overseers of the poor of the town of Buckland. Gentlemen : The family of John M. Hailey, whose legal settlement is in your town, but now residing in this town, being in needy circumstances, has applied to this board for relief, which we have…
1Opinion of the CourtColt, J.
The overseers of Shelburne gave a written notice, which was sufficient under the Gen. Sts. o. 70, § 17, to require from the overseers of the defendant town a written answer, within two months after its receipt. No written answer was returned, and by the terms of the statute the defendant, by this omission, is barred from contesting the question of settlement in this action. Gen. Sts. o. 70, § 18. New Bedford v. Hingham, 117 Mass. 445. The notice in the case at bar follows the form of the notice in Lynn v. Newburyport, 5 Allen, 545, which was there held sufficient. Judgment affirmed.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of New Bedford v. Inhabitants of HinghamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by1 opinion
- Stillwell v. KennedyNew York Supreme Court · 1889