Inhabitants of Hyde Park v. Inhabitants of Canton
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for expenses incurred in the support of Ellen Coughlin, a pauper. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiff, to this court, on appeal, upon an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows : Ellen Coughlin, whose maiden name was Ellen Roach, contracted a valid marriage with William Lovell of West Rutland, in the State of Vermont, of which place she was also a resident, at said West Rutland, on June 9,1867, and they…
Read the full summary
Contract for expenses incurred in the support of Ellen Coughlin, a pauper. The case was submitted to the Superior Court, and, after judgment for the plaintiff, to this court, on appeal, upon an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows : Ellen Coughlin, whose maiden name was Ellen Roach, contracted a valid marriage with William Lovell of West Rutland, in the State of Vermont, of which place she was also a resident, at said West Rutland, on June 9,1867, and they lived together as husband and wife at West'Rutland until June 1870, when he left his home and family, and has not been heard…
1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.
The question in this case is, Does the plaintiff, having the burden of proof upon it, show that Ellen Coughlin, a pauper, has a legal settlement in the defendant town? The only evidence offered in support of the proposition is the fact that, in March 1876, she was married to Jeremiah'Coughlin, who had a legal settlement therein. If that marriage was a valid marriage, the pauper’s settlement followed the settlement of her husband, and the defendant town is, upon the facts agreed, liable for her support; and the question for us to decide is, Does the plaintiff show that marriage to have been…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Davie v. BriggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
3Cited by14 opinions
- Northwestern Mut. Life Ins. v. StevensCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1895
- Turner v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Weidlich v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Modern Woodmen of America v. GhromleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Veazie v. StaplesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1941
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.