Inhabitants of Augusta v. Inhabitants of Kingfield
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Facts agreed. Assumpsit, for the support of one Granger, a pauper. The notice and answer were regular and seasonable. The amount claimed was necessarily expended. William Granger, the father of the pauper, never had a settlement in this State. In Sept. 1815, he married Sally Trask, the mother of the pauper, at the house of her father in Kingfield, —he then having a settlement in that town, and she residing with him.
Read the full summary
On Facts agreed. Assumpsit, for the support of one Granger, a pauper. The notice and answer were regular and seasonable. The amount claimed was necessarily expended. William Granger, the father of the pauper, never had a settlement in this State. In Sept. 1815, he married Sally Trask, the mother of the pauper, at the house of her father in Kingfield, —he then having a settlement in that town, and she residing with him. William Granger left his wife and the State, before the pauper was born at his grandfather’s in Kingfield, which was May 6, 1816, and has never contributed to the support of…
1Opinion of the Court
Howard, J. —
It is admitted that the father of the pauper never had a settlement within this State. The pauper would, therefore, “follow and have the settlement” of his mother, if she had any. Statute, 1821, c. 122, § 2, mode 2.
It is admitted that the mother resided with her father, when she was married, in 1815, and that he then had a settlement in Kingfield. But it is not admitted, or proved, that she had a derivative settlement from him; nor does it appear that she acquired a settlement in that town, unless it was gained subsequently to her marriage. It is not material in this case, to…
2Cited by2 opinions
- City of Syracuse v. County of Onondaga, New York County Courts1898
- Town of Croydon v. County of SullivanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1866