PROCEEDINGS RESPECTING THE SUPPORT OF POOR PERSONS Title VIII of Part VI of the Code of Criminal Procedure Section 914. Who may be compelled to support poor relatives. 915. Order to compel a person to support a poor relative, etc. 916. Court to hear the case, and make order of support. 917. Support, when to be apportioned among different relatives. 918. Order, to prescribe time during which support is to 919. Costs, by whom to be paid, and how enforced. 922. Seizure of their property; transfer thereof, when void. 923. Warrant and seizure, when confirmed or discharged; direction of the court thereon. 924. Warrant, in what cases to be discharged 925. Sale of the property seized and application of its proceeds. 926. Powers of superintendents of poor. Section 914. Who may be compelled to support poor relatives. -The father, mother and children, if of sufficient ability, of a poor person who is insane, blind, old, lame, impotent or decrepit, so as to be unable by work to maintain himself, must, at their own charge, relieve and maintain him in a manner to be approved by the overseers of the poor of the town where he is, or in The City of New York, by the commissioners of public charities. If such poor person be insane, he shall be maintained in the manner prescribed by the insanity law. The father, mother, husband, wife or children of a poor insane person legally committed to and confined in an institution supported in whole or in part by the state, shall be liable, if of sufficient ability, for the support and maintenance of such insane person from the time of his reception in such institution. (As amended by chapter 399 of the Laws of 1898) Where a son requests the superintendent of the poor to take proceedings to have his father committed to an asylum, and promises to pay a certain sum towards his future support he is liable therefor. Supreme Court, June, 1888, Herendeen v. DeWitt, 49 Hun, 53. A husband is not bound to maintain his wife's illegitimate children born before their marriage. Supreme Court, May, 1827, Minden v. Cox, 7 Cow. 235. Persons having relatives within prescribed degrees and whom they have sufficient ability to support are under an absolute duty, at their own charge, to support the persons described, not in the poorhouse, nor even through the agency of, but only in a manner to be approved by, the poor authorities of town or county. Supreme Court, April 13, 1892, Matter of Weaver v. Benjamin, 45 St. Rep. 97; 18 N. Y. Supp. 630, 631. This scheme is outside of the general provisions of the statute for the care and relief of the poor, who are, or who become, a public charge. Id. Its purpose is to prevent these persons from becoming a public charge. Id. It is not the intent that they are to be made and marked as public paupers by being consigned to the poorhouse of the county. Id. The order for support goes beyond the power of the court when it attaches to the liability of a party to support his mother, the condition that she shall receive such support in the county poorhouse. Id. The court has no power to prescribe the place where the poor person shall be supported, nor any of the conditions of such support, except that the manner of it shall be such as is approved by the overseers or superintendents of the poor. Id. Whatever power there is over that support is vested in the overseers or superintendents of the poor; the court can only declare the duty to support, and in default to fix the sum to be paid. Id. Supreme Court, March, 1885, In Stevens v. Cheney, 36 Hun, 1, the court said: "Under this statute (914) the child is bound to aid in the support of a parent if he is a poor person and unable to defend himself, and if he fails to do so, the court of sessions may compel him. If the child recognizes the duty laid upon him by statute to care for his indigent parent and voluntarily assumes it without waiting to be compelled by the court of sessions, what right have third persons or wrongdoers to interfere and prevent? The law affords the same protection to those who perform their duty voluntarily as it does to those who reluctantly act under compulsion, and we are of opinion that if the parent is a poor person within the provisions of the statute, it was the duty of the son to aid in his support, and if he voluntarily did that and the plaintiff has been deprived of his means of support by reason of the intoxication, that then he may recover, even though his child is over the age of twenty-one years." See, also, Supreme Court, October, 1895, De Puy v. Cook, 90 Hun, 43. Where two or more persons are equally liable to support an indigent person but are unequally able to grant such support, contribution may be ordered and all may be made to pay in accordance with their means. Court of Appeals, February 20, 1872, Stone v. Burgess, 47 N. Y. 521; 2 Lans, 439. The common law affords no means of compelling a husband to support his wife otherwise than by making him liable to third persons who have supplied her with necessaries after he has improperly refused to do so and the statute providing for the compulsory support of indigent relatives does not extend to husband and wife. Supreme Court, July, 1877, People ex rel. Kehlbeck v. Walsh, 11 Hun, 292. The wife of a man who is abundantly able to provide for her cannot be deemed a poor person. Superintendents of the poor cannot, as such, maintain an action against a husband for boarding, clothing and medical aid furnished to his wife as a pauper. Supreme Court, May, 1854, Norton et al. v. Rhodes, 18 Barb. 100. 915. Order to compel a person to support poor relatives, et cetera. If a relative of a poor person fail to relieve and maintain him as provided in the last section, the overseers of the poor of the town where he is, or in the city of New York, the commissioner of public charities may apply to the court of general sessions of the county of New York, or to the county court of any other county where the poor person dwells, for an order to compel such relief upon at least five days written notice, serve personally or by leaving it at the last place of residence of the person to whom it is directed, in case of his absence, with a person of suitable age and discretion. If such poor person be insane and legally committed to and confined in an institution supported in whole or in part by the state, and his relatives refuse or neglect to pay for his support and maintenance therein, application may be made by the treasurer of such institution in the manner provided in this section, for an order directing the relatives liable therefor to make such payment. (As amended by chapter 399 of the Laws of 1898, and chapter 520 of the Laws of 1904.) The overseers are the proper parties to begin proceedings to compel a father to support his poor and infirm son. Supreme Court, July, 1887, Tillotson v. Smith, 12 St. Rep. 331. See also Court of Appeals, February 20, 1872, Stone v. Burgess, 2 Lans. 439, 916. Court to hear the case and make order of support.-At the time appointed in the notice, the court or a judge thereof must proceed summarily to hear the allegations and proofs of the parties, and must order such of the relatives of the poor person mentioned in section nine hundred and fourteen, as were served with the notice and are of sufficient ability, to relieve and maintain him, specifying in the order the sum to be paid weekly for his support, and requiring it to be paid by the father, or if there be none, or if he be not of sufficient ability, then by the children, or if there be none, or if they be not of sufficient ability, then by the mother. If the application be made to secure an order compelling relatives to pay for the maintenance of insane poor persons committed to and confined in an institution supported in whole or in part by the state such order shall specify the sum to be paid for his maintenance by his relatives liable therefor, from the time of his reception in such institution to the time of making such order, and also the sum to be paid weekly for his future maintenance in such institution. The relatives served with such notice shall be deemed to be of sufficient ability, unless the contrary shall affirmatively appear to the satisfaction of the court or a judge thereof. (As amended by chapter 399 of the Laws of 1898.) § 917. Support; when to be apportioned among different relatives. If it appear that any such relative is unable to wholly maintain the poor person or to pay for his maintenance if confined in a state institution for the insane, but is able to contribute toward his support, the court or a judge thereof may direct two or more relatives, of different degrees, to maintain him or to pay for his maintenance in such an institution if insane, prescribing the proportion which each must contribute for that purpose; and if it appear that the relatives are not of sufficient ability wholly to maintain him, or to pay for his maintenance in such an institution, if insane, but are able to contribute something, the court or a judge thereof must direct the sum, in proportion to their ability, which they shall pay weekly for that purpose. If it appears that the relatives who are liable for the maintenance of an insane poor person confined in a state institution for the insane are not able to pay the whole amount due for such maintenance from the time of such poor person's admission to such institution, the court or a judge thereof must direct the sum to be paid for such maintenance in proportion to the ability of the relatives liable therefor. (As amended by chapter 399 of the Laws of 1898.) Two out of five children may be ordered to support an indigent parent, and those two in unequal amounts. Court of Appeals, February 20, 1872. Stone v. Burgess, 2 Lans. 439. The liability of the children charged by the order is several, and either is iable on default, in an action to recover the payment required of him by the order. Id. Where the poor are a charge upon the county, the action to enforce such support is properly brought by the superintendent of the poor. Id. See Supreme Court, June 23, 1888, Herendeen v. DeWitt, 17 St. Rep. 298; 1 N. Y. Supp. 469; 49 Hun, 55. § 918. Order to prescribe time during which support is to continue, or may be indefinite; when and how order may be varied. The order may specify the time during which the relatives must maintain the poor person, or during which any of the sums directed by the court or a judge thereof are to be paid. or it may be indefinite or until the further order of the court or a judge thereof. If the order be for payment of a weekly sum for the maintenance of an insane poor person in a state institution, the order shall specify that such sum shall be paid as long as such insane poor person is maintained in such institution. The court or a judge thereof may from time to time vary the order, as circumstances may require, on the application either of any relative affected by it, or of an officer on whose application the order was made, upon ten days' written notice. (As amended by chapter 399 of the Laws of 1898.) So long as an order, made by a court of sessions, directing the relative of a poor person to pay a specified sum periodically to the superintendent of the poor for the support of such poor person, remains unchanged, such relative is liable to pay the sum therein prescribed. If he or she desires to be relieved therefrom application to amend the order should be made. If the person directed by an order of the Court of Sessions to pay a certain sum of money per week, payable monthly to a superintendent of the poor, to be applied exclusively to the support of her daughter, desires to relieve herself from the effect thereof, she should apply to the Court of Sessions under the provisions of this section for its modification, but so long as the order remains unchanged such person is, by force of the statute, liable to pay the sum therein prescribed. Supreme Court, October, 1892, Aldridge v. Walker, 73 Hun, 281; 57 St. Rep. 273; 26 N. Y. Supp. 296. Such an order is not void because it gives no option to such person either to support her daughter or to pay the amount provided, and if it is irregular or improper the remedy is by appeal, and the question of its irregularity or impropriety cannot be properly raised in an action brought to collect the amount directed to be paid by such person and unpaid by her. Id. While the determination provided for by this title is denominated an order, it was a final determination of the matter, and in effect a judgment. Id. See Supreme Court, April 13, 1892, matter of Weaver v. Benjamin, 45 St. Rep. 97; 18 N. Y. Supp. 631; Supreme Court, June 23, 1888, Herendeen v. DeWitt, 17 St. Rep. 298; 49 Hun, 55; 1 N. Y. Supp. 469. § 919. Costs, by whom to be paid, and how enforced. - The costs and expenses of the application must be ascertained by the court, and paid by the relatives against whom the order is made; and the payment thereof, and obedience to the order of maintenance, and to any order for the payment of money, may be enforced by attachment. |