Hurst v. Lane
This text of 31 S.E. 135 (Hurst v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
There being evidence to warrant a finding that the plaintiff below, in the capacity of a servant, rendered to her deceased uncle and to his wife services for which payment was contemplated, and that these services were not exclusively such as would be prompted by affection and a sense of duty, she was entitled to a recovery against his executors; and having, under the court’s direction, written off a portion of the verdict returned in her favor, the ■same, as thus amended, was not excessive in amount. See Murrell v. Studstill, 104 Ga. 604.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
31 S.E. 135, 105 Ga. 506, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurst-v-lane-ga-1898.