Town of Landgrove v. Town of Peru
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal from an order of removal of Nathan Richardson and his wife from Landgrove to Peru. Plea, that the paupers were unduly removed, and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of removal of Nathan Richardson and his wife from Landgrove to Peru. Plea, that the paupers were unduly removed, and trial by jury. It appeared in evidence that the pauper, from 1818 to 1833, resided on a lot of land, which was claimed by both Landgrove and Peru to be within their respective charter limits, and that he had gained no legal settlement since 1833. From a plan of the town - of Peru, it appeared that the proprietors of that town had allotted and claimed the land as far east as the “Munn line,” which was run in 1770, and which was claimed to be the ancient and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Ch. J.
The defendant town relied upon having shown a settlement of the pauper in Landgrove, by a residence there *425for over seven years. It appears that he resided on a lot of land claimed by each party to be in'their several and respective towns. If a jurisdictional line had been settled between the two towns, undoubtedly the pauper would have acquired a settlement in the town, in which, according to the jurisdictional line, he resided. It is also true, that, if there is no such jurisdictional line, or if it is disputed, and both towns have…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Town of Corinth v. Town of NewburySupreme Court of Vermont · 1841
3Cited by2 opinions
- Inhabitants of Somerset v. Inhabitants of RehobothMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1850
- Town of Reading v. Town of WeathersfieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858