Overseers of the Poor v. Overseers of the Poor
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an appeal from an order of removal of Phebe Hatch and three of her children from the town of Brookfield to Hartland, made on the 5th day of September, 1833, — and the removal actually made as appears by the officer’s return on the 27th day of the same September.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from an order of removal of Phebe Hatch and three of her children from the town of Brookfield to Hartland, made on the 5th day of September, 1833, — and the removal actually made as appears by the officer’s return on the 27th day of the same September. In the county court a motion was made to quash the proceedings by the defendant’s counsel, assigning for reasons: 1st. That the said Phebe Hatch and family were not likely to become chargeable to the town of Brookfield. It was proved by the defendants, that said Phebe Hatch was possessed as tenant by dower of a small house,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was pronouced by
Williams, Ch. J.-
— The question to be decided in this case, was considered and decided in the case of Londonderry vs. A.cton. — 3 Vt. Rep. 122. The authority of that case was recognized in the case of Middletown vs. Pawlet, 202. A person cannot be removed as a pauper, from his freehold. In examining the cases where this principle has been mentioned, the case of a tenant in dower is found to be one. From the cases decided, it is manifest that the pauper in question, was not liable to be removed from the house and land which *405she occupied as tenant in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Town of Londonderry v. Town of ActonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1830
- Town of Barnet v. Town of ConcordSupreme Court of Vermont · 1832
- Overseers of the Poor of Corinth v. Overseers of the Poor of BradfordSupreme Court of Vermont · 1827
3Cited by1 opinion
- Town of Dummerston v. Town of NewfaneSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864