Nesbitt v. . Donoho

150 S.E. 875, 198 N.C. 147, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 439
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedDecember 30, 1929
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 150 S.E. 875 (Nesbitt v. . Donoho) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nesbitt v. . Donoho, 150 S.E. 875, 198 N.C. 147, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 439 (N.C. 1929).

Opinion

Stacy, 0! J.

Services rendered gratuitously to one in his lifetime may not successfully be used as the basis of an action against his estate, and, in certain family relationships, the law presumes that such services were intended to be gratuitous. Henderson v. McLain, 146 N. C., 329, 59 S. E., 873; Staley v. Lowe, 197 N. C., 243. But this is a presumption which may be overcome or rebutted by proof of an agreement to pay, or of facts and circumstances permitting the inference that payment was intended on the one hand and expected on the other. Dunn v. Currie, 141 N. C., 123, 53 S. E., 533; Brown v. Williams, 196 N. C., 247, 145 S. E., 233.

*148 Tbe present ease, we think, falls within the class supporting a quantum, m&ruit recovery. Winkler v. Killian, 141 N. C., 575, 54 S. E., 540. The ruling of the court in this respect is approved.

While not material, the case elicited a bit of mountain vernacular, perhaps worthy of preservation. It was in evidence that the plaintiffs’ little daughter, eight or nine years of age, was often seen “doing many chores around the house, toting in stovewood and fetching water from a spring about 200 yards away,” which, in answer to the question as to whether it was uphill or downhill from the house to the spring, the witness described it as being “downhill a-going and uphill a-coming.”

We have discovered no action or ruling of the trial court which, we apprehend, should be held for reversible error. Hence, the verdict and judgment will be upheld.

No error.

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

Related

Brown v. Hatcher
149 S.E.2d 586 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1966)
Johnson v. Sanders
132 S.E.2d 582 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)
Simmons v. Simmons
1960 OK 214 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1960)
Gales v. Smith
106 S.E.2d 164 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)
Wasson v. Wasson
253 P.2d 236 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1953)
Lindley v. Frazier
55 S.E.2d 815 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1949)
Potter Ex Rel. Hardison v. Clark
49 S.E.2d 636 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1948)
Stewart v. . Wyrick
45 S.E.2d 764 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1947)
Coley v. . Dalrymple
33 S.E.2d 477 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Francis v. . Francis
26 S.E.2d 907 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1943)
Landreth v. . Morris
200 S.E. 378 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)
Owen v. . Williams
191 S.E. 328 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)
Lipe v. Citizens Bank & Trust Co.
178 S.E. 665 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1935)
Farmers Bank of Clayton v. McCullers
160 S.E. 497 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 S.E. 875, 198 N.C. 147, 1929 N.C. LEXIS 439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nesbitt-v-donoho-nc-1929.