Inhabitants of Monroe v. Inhabitants of Hampden
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion by defendant. Assumpsit for pauper supplies. Verdict for plaintiff. The case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
Motion to set aside the verdict wbicb was for tbe plaintiffs. The pauper had his original derivative settlement in the defendant town, but the defendants claimed that he subsequently gained a settlement in his own right in the town of Swan-ville, by having his home there for five successive years after he *112became of age, without directly or indirectly receiving pauper supplies.
In March, 1875, when the pauper became of age, he had his home with his aunt in the town of Swanville, and continued to have his home with her until the following summer, when he finally left her house and went to work…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Inhabitants of Gouldsboro v. Inhabitants of SullivanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1934
- Connolly v. SerunianSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1941
- Inhabitants of Somerville v. Inhabitants of SmithfieldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1928
- Inhabitants of Fort Fairfield v. Inhabitants of MillinocketSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1940