Inhabitants of Fryeburg v. Inhabitants of Brownfield

Citation68 Me. 145
PartiesINHABITANTS OF FRYEBURG v. INHABITANTS OF BROWNFIELD.
Decision Date03 April 1878
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)

ON EXCEPTIONS to the overruling of the defendants' demurrer to the declaration, and of their motion for leave to withdraw their demurrer, and plead anew.

CASE for pauper supplies.

Declaration, for that heretofore, to wit: On the second day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five, Georgiana Booth, who was then and there and still is the lawful wife of Frank Booth of said Brownfield had and for a long time prior thereto and ever since has had her lawful settlement in said town of Brownfield, by reason whereof, the said town of Brownfield, during all of said time was and still is liable for her support, and on said second day of June aforesaid, the said Georgiana Booth, so having her lawful settlement in said town of Brownfield, was found in said town of Fryeburg destitute and on account of poverty in need of relief; wherefore being so found, the overseers of the poor of said town of Fryeburg relieved the said Georgiana Booth, by then and there in said town of Fryeburg furnishing and providing for her, proper, necessary and sufficient food, lodging and medical supplies mentioned in the schedule hereto annexed. And the plaintiffs aver that all the expenses in relieving the said Georgiana Booth, mentioned in said schedule, remaining unpaid and amounting to the sum of forty dollars and fifty cents, were necessary and reasonable. And the plaintiffs further aver that within three months next after the said second day of June aforesaid, to wit: on the fourth day of June, in the year eighteen hundred and seventy-five, the overseers of the poor of said Fryeburg sent a written notice signed by them, stating the facts aforesaid respecting the said Georgiana Booth, to the overseers of the poor of the said town of Brownfield, and requesting them to remove the said Georgiana Booth; but they refused and neglected so to do. Whereby and by reason whereof, the said inhabitants of Brownfield became liable, and in consideration thereof, then and there promised the plaintiffs to pay them the sum of forty dollars and fifty cents on demand."

The action was entered at the March term, 1876, and continued to the December term, and on the first day put on the trial docket. On the sixth day the defendants filed a special demurrer, which was joined by the plaintiffs and overruled by the presiding justice; whereupon and before exceptions filed and allowed, the defendants moved for leave to plead anew instanter and proceed to trial to the jury; but the presiding justice overruled the motion, on the ground that the ruling on the demurrer precluded the defendants' right to trial; whereupon the defendants moved for leave to withdraw the demurrer; but the presiding justice overruled the motion, and the defendants alleged exceptions.

J B. Eaton, for the defendants.

D R. Hastings, f...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Hutchins v. Libby
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • December 30, 1953
    ...and no such case has been called to our attention. In fact all the decisions indicate the contrary. In Inhabitants of Fryeburg v. Inhabitants of Brownfield, 1878, 68 Me. 145, 147, Walton, J., says: 'The defendants complain because they were not allowed to withdraw their demurrer and plead a......
  • Clark v. Boyd
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • January 31, 1921
    ...second term without reserving the right to plead over, the judgment should be final at the next term. Section 36, a 87, B. S.; Fryeburg v. Brownfield, 68 Me. 145; Fox v. Bennett, 84 Me. 338, 24 Atl. 878; Rollins v. Power Co., 112 Me. 175, 91 Atl. 837; Furbish v. Robertson, 67 Me. Exceptions......
  • Palmer v. Inhabitants of Town of Blaine
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • November 22, 1917
    ...plead anew after the demurrer has been overruled. In such case judgment is to be entered for the plaintiff. R. S. c. 87, § 36; Fryeburg v. Brownfield, 68 Me. 145; Roberts v. Niles, 95 Me. 244, 49 Atl. 2. The ruling ordering judgment for the plaintiff in this case was correct, and the except......
  • Mayberry v. Brackett
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • February 12, 1881
    ... ... Bradford, 51 Me. 414; Shelden v ... Call, 55 Me. 159; Fryeburg v. Brownfield, 68 ... Clarence Hale, for the defendants ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT