Directors of Schuylkill v. Overseers of Montour
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Fleas of Schuylkill.county. This was an action of assumpsit, by The Overseers of the Poor of Montour township, in the county of Columbia, against The Directors of the Poor and House of Employment of the county of Schuylkill, to recover the money expended by plaintiffs in the “ care, attention, food, clothing, medicine, and medical attendance, costs, charges, and surgery found for and bestowed on John Kashner and his family, paupers, and for the éxpenses…
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Fleas of Schuylkill.county. This was an action of assumpsit, by The Overseers of the Poor of Montour township, in the county of Columbia, against The Directors of the Poor and House of Employment of the county of Schuylkill, to recover the money expended by plaintiffs in the “ care, attention, food, clothing, medicine, and medical attendance, costs, charges, and surgery found for and bestowed on John Kashner and his family, paupers, and for the éxpenses of removing them to the almshouse in Schuylkill county,” where his legal settlement was, &c., &c. To this the defendants…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, by
Woodward, J.
The order of removal unappealed from was *486conclusive against all parties named in it: 3 Burn’s Just. 594-7; 3 Casey 277 ; 10 Id. 232. Why, then, should it be so earnestly argued that the Common Pleas has not jurisdiction to try a settlement case? No such question was open on this record. The last legal settlement of the pauper had been conclusively fixed by the unappealed order of removal, and was not an open question for the Common Pleas or any court to try. This action was founded on that ascertained and established fact — it was not…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Rizer v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1882
- Poor District v. Poor DistrictSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897