Tallahatchie County v. Harrison

75 Miss. 744
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 15, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 75 Miss. 744 (Tallahatchie County v. Harrison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tallahatchie County v. Harrison, 75 Miss. 744 (Mich. 1898).

Opinion

Terral, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Dr. Harrison sued Tallahatchie county for medical services rendered to Jim Simmons, and recovered judgment in the circuit court for §>96. It appears from the evidence that Simmons was very poor, had a blind wife and several minor children unable to render any assistance for the support of their parents; that Simmons was very ill, and in indigent circumstances, and that his physicians, thinking they had done enough for him in charity by their previous attention to him, called in Dr. High, a member of the board of supervisors, who, upon examination, declared that he thought Simmons was a pauper, and would die unless attended to, and requested the physicians to attend him, and promised that he would see that the board of supervisors paid the claim. It was admitted that the services were rendered by Dr. Harrison, and that the charges therefor were reasonable. Simmons recovered from his sickness, and there was no evidence that Simmons was ever declared a pauper by the board of supervisors, nor was there any evidence that he desired to be so declared and provided for by the county. Our poor laws are intended for the class of persons mentioned in the statute who apply for support thereunder, and who are found by the board, upon examination, to be entitled to such support, or for persons who, being of the class intended, apply for support, and die before being so adjudicated. That Simmons was indigent, and stood in great need of medical aid, is apparent, but we fail to [746]*746see the evidence in the record that would entitle him to the benefits conferred by the statute.

The judgment is reversed, and the ease is remanded for a new trial.

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

Related

Miller v. Tucker
105 So. 774 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
75 Miss. 744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tallahatchie-county-v-harrison-miss-1898.