Farrington v. Minturn

57 A. 269, 70 N.J.L. 627, 41 Vroom 627, 1904 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 215
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedFebruary 23, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 57 A. 269 (Farrington v. Minturn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Farrington v. Minturn, 57 A. 269, 70 N.J.L. 627, 41 Vroom 627, 1904 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 215 (N.J. 1904).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This action is brought to recover for services alleged to have been rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant’s testatrix during her lifetime. No express contract to pay a specified sum for such services was proved. The recovery was sought upon quantum meruit, and the plaintiff had a verdict for $3,587. An examination of the testimony in the cause satisfies us that this amount is grossly in excess of the value of the services rendered. The testatrix, by her will, left the plaintiff a legacy of $1,000. That sum is ample compensation for the services rendered to her by him. There is nothing in the facts proved to justify the conclusion that she intended to pay him otherwise than by this legacy, except the plaintiff’s own statement on the witness-stand, and that statement was incompetent and should have been stricken out on the motion made for that purpose by the defendant’s counsel.

The rule to show cause should be made absolute.

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

Related

In re Estate of Jacobsen
39 A.2d 704 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1944)
Cherniak v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America
14 A.2d 334 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1940)
Pizzella v. Pichard
164 A. 892 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
57 A. 269, 70 N.J.L. 627, 41 Vroom 627, 1904 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farrington-v-minturn-nj-1904.