Case ID: conn_101/html/0751-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Louisa DeRusso vs. Frederick W. Dauch, Administrator.
    Third Judicial District, Bridgeport,
    October Term, 1924.
    Wheeler, C. J., Beach, Curtis, Keeler and Kellogg, Js.
    Argued October 30th
    decided December 1st, 1924.
    Action to recover the reasonable value of personal services alleged to have been rendered by the plaintiff at the request of the defendant’s intestate, brought to and tried by the Superior Court in New Haven County, Jennings, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the defendant, and appeal by the plaintiff.
    
      No error.
    
    
      George R. Guilfoile and Joseph A. Bergin, for the appellant (plaintiff).
    
      Edward Mascota, for the appellee (defendant).
   Per Curiam.

The plaintiff claims that an implied contract existed by which the defendant’s intestate was to pay the plaintiff for her services in nursing, sewing and washing for the intestate, independent of any contract to pay plaintiff for her services in furnishing the intestate board and room. The primary difficulty in the claim is that the trial court has found that no such implied contract ever existed, but that the intestate paid plaintiff $25 a month, which covered not only the board and room, but the nursing, sewing and washing, and that the plaintiff never expected to be paid anything further and the intestate intended this payment to cover all of these services. The finding was made upon conflicting evidence and cannot be corrected in the particulars as claimed by the plaintiff. Without such correction the plaintiff-appellant cannot prevail.

There is no error.