Overseers of the Poor of Norwich v. Over Seers of the Poor of New-Berlin
New York Supreme Court
^ ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Chenango. Taylor and Medbury, defendants in error, as overseers of D00r 0f (he town of New Berlin, brought an action of as-I ° sumnsit against Rouse and Thompson, overseers of the poor of * o i 1 the town of Norwich, on a special contract, dated July 3,1808, . , . between the supervisors and the overseers oi the poor of the two towns.
Read the full summary
^ ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Chenango. Taylor and Medbury, defendants in error, as overseers of D00r 0f (he town of New Berlin, brought an action of as-I ° sumnsit against Rouse and Thompson, overseers of the poor of * o i 1 the town of Norwich, on a special contract, dated July 3,1808, . , . between the supervisors and the overseers oi the poor of the two towns. By a statute passed the 3d of April, 1807, the old town of Norwich was divided, and a part thereof erected into a new town, by the name of New-Berlin. The act contained the usual provision, “ that the supervisors and…
1Opinion of the CourtPlatt, J.
delivered -the opinion of- the Court. I think there is no foundation for either of the exceptions taken at the trial.
The written agreement was specially declared on ; and whether it wms obligatory on the defendant below, or not, it was at least pertinent evidence under the general issue, and the exception to the relevancy of that agreement, could properly be taken advantage of only by demurrer, or by motion in arrest of judgment. But the record is before us on the writ of error; and although the bill of exceptions was frivolous, yet the question fairly occurs, does the declaration show a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Board of Ed'n v. Board of Ed'nWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1887
- Jansen v. OstranderNew York Supreme Court · 1824
- Inhabitants of Westport v. Inhabitants of DartmouthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813