Salisbury v. Fairfield

1 Root 131
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided August 15, 1789·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[132] And

by the Court.

Tbe pauper’s residing in Stamford as an apprentice gained no settlement; and Ms residing there with, bis guardian three years, gained no settlement, neither in right of his guardian, nor in Ms own right by commorancy; he was not a subject of being warned, nor might he be parted from his guardian during his minority; his residence therefore in Stamford was of necessity, and not by the approbation of the town of Stamford.

This judgment was affirmed in the Supreme Court of Errors..

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Salisbury v. Fairfield, 1 Root 131 (Colo. Ct. App. 1789).

1 Root 131 (Salisbury v. Fairfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Town of Plainville v. Town of Milford
177 A. 138 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1935)