Rogers v. Inhabitants of Newbury
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract on an account annexed “ for services in taking care cf Josiah Eastman and wife twenty-four days ” in February 1869. Writ dated June 12,1869. The answer was a general denial.
Read the full summary
Contract on an account annexed “ for services in taking care cf Josiah Eastman and wife twenty-four days ” in February 1869. Writ dated June 12,1869. The answer was a general denial. At the trial in the superior court, before Putnam, J., the plaintiff offered evidence that she rendered the alleged services in nursing the persons named in her account, and that they were aged persons who had fallen into distress and were in need of immediate relief from the defendants; and she sought to recover either on an express contract with the defendants’ overseers of the poor, or under the Gen. Sts. e.…
1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.
1. The plaintiff, having failed to prove any express contract with the proper officers of the defendant town, is not entitled to a verdict unless she can bring her case within the provisions of the Gen. Sts. c. 70, § 16. It is admitted that the jury were correctly instructed as to the facts which it was incumbent upon her to prove, in order to avail herself of the terms of that section; and the verdict shows that, so far as proof of the facts is concerned, she fulfilled all the conditions upon which her right of action depends. But the sufficiency of her declaration is by no means equally…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Crandell v. WhiteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
- O'Keefe v. City of NorthamptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Inhabitants of Cape Elizabeth v. LombardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1879
- Newbit v. Inhabitants of AppletonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1874
- Sawyer v. Inhabitants of NaplesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1876