Overseers of the Poor of Wallkill v. Overseers of the Poor of Mamakating
New York Supreme Court
ON appeal from the order of the court of general sessions of the peace of Orange county. Two justices had given an order to remove Bainsley Stevens, a pauper, and his family, from the town of Wallkill, to the town of Mamakating.
Read the full summary
ON appeal from the order of the court of general sessions of the peace of Orange county. Two justices had given an order to remove Bainsley Stevens, a pauper, and his family, from the town of Wallkill, to the town of Mamakating. The pauper, in the year 1810 and 1811, resided in Mamakating, and was assessed in that town, in 1810, for a tax, to ten cents, xvhich he paid; and in 1811, he was assessed a tax of 48 cents, in the same town, xvhich the collector paid for him, but without the request of the pauper, who then had property sufficient to pay the tax. He afterwards removed to Wallkill, and…
1Per curiam
This is an application to reverse the order of the court of sessions, in Orange, by which they reversed the order of two justices, removing certain paupers from Wallkill to Mamakating. The question is, whether the pauper had gained any settlement in Mamakating, by the payment of taxes. In 1810, lie was taxed and paid 10 cents. In 1811 he was assessed 48 cents, but did not pay it: the collector, however, paid it for him, but without his request. A settlement, by payment of taxes, is gained by being charged with, and paying, such taxes, for the space of two years. (1 N. R. L. 279.) There was,…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Badger v. PhinneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
- Neely v. JonesWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1880
- Jaffrey v. CornishSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1840
- Moore v. KepnerNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
- Lisbon v. BathSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1850
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.