City of Cambridge v. City of Boston
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for money expended, in December 1879, by the plaintiff, for the relief of Bridget Nolan, a pauper, whose settlement was alleged to be in the defendant city. Answer, a general denial.
Read the full summary
Contract for money expended, in December 1879, by the plaintiff, for the relief of Bridget Nolan, a pauper, whose settlement was alleged to be in the defendant city. Answer, a general denial. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiff, to this court, on appeal, on agreed facts in substance as follows: The plaintiff is entitled to recover the amount claimed if Bridget Nolan had a settlement in Boston in December 1879 and January 1880. Upon that question the material facts are as follows: Bridget Nolan married Hugh Nolan on August 11, 1861, in Boston,…
1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.
The mode by which relief shall be granted to the suffering poor is wholly a matter of statute regulation, and this is the case whether the relief which is afforded is to be at the cost of the person or corporation which affords it, or whether it is ultimately to be borne by some other person or corporation. It is a matter wholly within the discretion of the Legislature to determine what kindred, if any, shall support indigent persons incapable of supporting themselves, and under what circumstances any city or town shall be required to furnish such support, or whether the Commonwealth shall…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Bradford v. City of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- City of Cambridge v. Board of Railroad CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Opinion of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Attorney General v. Board of Public WelfareMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.