Legal Opinion

City of Augusta v. Inhabitants of Mexico

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided August 22, 1944PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHudson, J.

This pauper case is reported upon an agreed statement of facts. The principal question is whether the pauper settlement of an illegitimate child derived at birth from its mother follows and changes with her subsequent pauper settlements. Herein there was neither emancipation nor acquisition by the child of a new pauper settlement in its own right.

R. S. 1930, Chap. 33, Sec. 1, Par. HI, provided that “Illegitimate children have the settlement of their mother, at the time of their birth ...” (Italics ours.) But this statute was amended by P. L. 1933, Chap. 203, Sec. 3, to read as follows:…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Inhabitants of Guilford v. Inhabitants of MonsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1936
  2. Guilford & Sangerville Water District v. Sangerville Water Supply Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1931
  3. Inhabitants of Albany v. Inhabitants of NorwaySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1910

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. LondonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1960
  2. Winne v. County of BergenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1956
  3. Jager v. GrommeshNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Angela M. Smith, Personal Representatives of the Estate of Peter A. Smith v. John R. HensonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2025
  5. Inhabitants of Town of Hartland v. INHABITANTS, ETC.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1953

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