¶1The statute is — That every person who shall he poor and impotent, unable to support and provide for themselves having no estate, shall be provided for, etc. by such of them relations as stand in the line or degree of father or mother, grandfather or grandmother, children or grandchildren, if of sufficient ability — sons-in-law are not within the line or degree mentioned by the statute. Kirby’s Rep. 155, Mack v. Parsons, etc.
1 Root 250
Sherman v. Nichols
Decided January 15, 1791
Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1791-01-15
EeboR to reverse a judgment of the County Court on a petition brought by said Nichols against Sherman, etc. to compel them to contribute towards the maintenance of Joseph Hurd their wives’ father. The County Court gave judgment —-That they should contribute. Error — That daughters’ husbands are not compellable to contribute to the support of their wives’ parents. Judgment — Manifest error.
Decided 1791-01-15