Knapp v. Rose, Admrx.

5 Conn. Super. Ct. 333
Connecticut Superior Court·Decided November 15, 1937·No. File No. 53638·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The plaintiff seeks to recover remuneration for services rendered to and moneys expended for the defendant's decedent during a period while he was a member of the decedent's family living as one household.

Such a plaintiff in order to recover must affirmatively show either that an express contract for the remuneration existed, or that the circumstances under which the services and expenditures were rendered and made were such as exhibit a reasonable and proper expectation that there would be compensation therefor. (Cotter vs. Cotter, 82 Conn. 331 at 332.) In the present case the plaintiff failed to establish either of *Page 334 the foregoing situations.

Judgment is therefore rendered for the defendant upon the issues of the complaint, and for the defendant to recover of the plaintiff her costs.

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

Knapp v. Rose, Admrx., 5 Conn. Super. Ct. 333 (Colo. Ct. App. 1937).

5 Conn. Super. Ct. 333 (Knapp v. Rose, Admrx.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Air Flo v. Consolidated Engineers Constr., No. 304911 (Jan. 13, 1992)
1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 836 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1992)
Greco v. Almstead, No. Cv89 26 04 31 (Feb. 25, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 1243 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)