Legal Opinion

Inhabitants of Moscow v. Inhabitants of Solon

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 22, 1939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtManser, J.

On defendant’s motion for new trial. The case is for pauper supplies furnished to Andrew Rollins, his wife and minor children. By stipulation the only issue raised was as to the settlement of the pauper. It was agreed that his original derivative *221settlement was in the plaintiff town; that he came to Solon in 1917 and left in 1923, during all of which time he was employed by the railroad company as a section hand; and that he received no pauper supplies during this period. It was also admitted that for each of the years 1918 to 1923, he was assessed a poll tax in Solon and paid the same.

Upon…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Inhabitants of Searsmont v. Inhabitants of ThorndikeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1885
  2. Inhabitants of Ellsworth v. Inhabitants of Bar HarborSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1923
  3. Inhabitants of Madison v. Inhabitants of FairfieldSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1933
  4. City of Bangor v. Inhabitants of FrankfortSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1892
  5. Inhabitants of Searsmont v. Inhabitants of LincolnvilleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1890

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Inhabitants of Town of Bethel v. INHABITANTS, ETC.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API