Overseers v. Overseers
New York Supreme Court
THIS was a special action on the case. The declaration stated, that on the 8th of August, 1815,' one Elijah Briggs, a pauper, having no legal settlement in this state, and being destitute of property, and wholly unable to support himself, was residing in Plattsburgh ; that Nichols and Palmer, two of the justices of the peace of the county of Clinton, upon complaint made to them by the defendant Morse and one _ , mirk, then overseers of the town of Plattsburgh, that the…
Read the full summary
THIS was a special action on the case. The declaration stated, that on the 8th of August, 1815,' one Elijah Briggs, a pauper, having no legal settlement in this state, and being destitute of property, and wholly unable to support himself, was residing in Plattsburgh ; that Nichols and Palmer, two of the justices of the peace of the county of Clinton, upon complaint made to them by the defendant Morse and one _ , mirk, then overseers of the town of Plattsburgh, that the pauper not having any legal settlement in that town had come to reside therein, and was likely to become a charge to the…
1Per curiam
The plea was confessed to be bad ; but the defendants insist that the declaration is. bad ; that therefore, is the point to be considered.
In the case of the Overseers of the Poor of Tioga v. the Overseers of Seneca, (13 Johns. Rep. 380.) we held that assumpsit would not lie in a case like the present, on the ground that it did not appear that the pauper was settled in the town from which he was removed. We waived any decision on the question, whether a moral obligation was sufficient to sustain the action, wherqthere was no request to afford maintenance to the pauper. In that case, too, we…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Norton v. RhodesNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- India Wharf Brewing Co. v. Brooklyn Wharf & Warehouse Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Norton v. RhodesNew York Supreme Court · 1854