Barrett v. Allen

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Barrett v. Allen

99 S.E. 540, 24 Ga. App. 14, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 383

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1919

Docket10315

StatusPublished

This text of 99 S.E. 540 (Barrett v. Allen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barrett v. Allen, 99 S.E. 540, 24 Ga. App. 14, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 383 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

'Bkoyles, P. J.

1. Under tlie facts of the case the following charge was error: “The plaintiff can not recover in this case for services and board, unless it is shown that there was an agreement by which the defendant was to pay for them when she went to live with her son-in-law, Barrett [the plaintiff]. The law is that services rendered and board furnished by one near relative to another are presumed to be gratuitous, and the burden in such case is upon the plaintiff to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there was a contract between the parties by which such services and board were to be paid for by the party.” Murrell v. Studstill, 104 Ga. 604, 606 (30 S. E. 750) ; Wall v. Wall, 15 Ga. App. 156 (82 S. E. 791), and cases there cited.

2. As there must be a new trial of the case on account of the error in the charge of the court, the question whether the verdict is supported by evidence is not passed upon.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth and Stephens, JJ., concur.

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

'Bkoyles, P. J.

1. Under tlie facts of the case the following charge was error: “The plaintiff can not recover in this case for services and board, unless it is shown that there was an agreement by which the defendant was to pay for them when she went to live with her son-in-law, Barrett [the plaintiff]. The law is that services rendered and board furnished by one near relative to another are presumed to be gratuitous, and the burden in such case is upon the plaintiff to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there was a contract between the parties by which such services and board were to be paid for by the party.” Murrell v. Studstill, 104 Ga. 604, 606 (30 S. E. 750) ; Wall v. Wall, 15 Ga. App. 156 (82 S. E. 791), and cases there cited.

2. As there must be a new trial of the case on account of the error in the charge of the court, the question whether the verdict is supported by evidence is not passed upon.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth and Stephens, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 S.E. 540, 24 Ga. App. 14, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrett-v-allen-gactapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack