Inhabitants of Deer-Isle v. Eaton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
* This was assumpsit for money laid out and expend- [*3281 ed, and was submitted to the Court for their decision upon the following facts.
Read the full summary
* This was assumpsit for money laid out and expend- [*3281 ed, and was submitted to the Court for their decision upon the following facts. In the month of November, 1806, Polly Thomas, who had her legal settlement in the town of Deer-Isle, fell sick in the town of Bluehill, and was supplied with medicines and other necessaries by that town to the amount of $ 37.50, which the plaintiffs .reimbursed in 1811. In August, 1810, the defendant, Moses Eaton, married the said pauper, who was at that time without property. If, upon these facts, it should be the opinion of the Court that the action…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
This is an action altogether of a new impression; and we do not perceive any principle upon which it can be maintained. At the time the supplies were furnished by the town of JBluehill, the town of Deer-Isle became immediately liable, because the pauper’s lawful settlement was in that town. But no contract, express or implied, existed between the pauper and the town. The liability of the town is created by law ; and, if the party supplied be in fact a pauper, no debt is created.
It would be strange to conceive that the instant a town had furnished support to a pauper a right of action accrued,…
2Cited by6 opinions
- City of Worcester v. QuinnMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939
- Landes v. PerkinsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1848
- Bremer County v. CurtisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
- Stewart's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Ayer v. BartlettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1827
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.