Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1926-09-28
RESCRIPTS ISSUED
IN THREE CASES BY
LAW COURT, MONDAY

y uSlICe NOTllan L. baSSeIt. L he
rescript which is one of the first
ones to be drawn by Justice Bassett
is self explanatory and reads as fol1
lows:
Action by a daughter against the
estate of her father for housekeep-
ing and care from August q. 1918,
being six years prior to date of writ,
to May 30. 1922, 1914 weeks. Verdict
of $9lS for the plaintiff. General
motion for new trial.
Held:
l. For a relative or member of
the household to recover payment
for services there must be a con-
tract.
2. The contract may be express
or implied as a matter not of law
but of fact.
3. The contract must be proved
in accordance with the ordinary rule
Of burden of proof.
4. 1t is not enough to show that
the valuable service was rendered. 1t
must appear that the one who rem
dered service expected at the time
the services were performed COM
pensation and the one who received
SO understood or under the circum-
stances ought so to have understood
and by his words or conduct or both
justified the expectation.
8. There is not in any given case
a legal presumption of any kind that
the services were rendered gratui-
tously or for compensation.
8. When the parties bear the re-
lationship to each other as in this
case the determination whether upon
the circumstances existing in each
case the services were rendered on
1a hoe ~ ,Nt ir do
clared by our court to be peculiarly
the province of the jury"
Z. The jury concluded there
was a mutual understanding for
compensation and we cannot say
that as a matter of-law there was
not evidence from which such I'M
Outstanding could not be inferred
or that the jury's verdict was due
to bias or prejudice or was mani
testify wrong.
Motion overruled.
Penobscot County Case
A motion for a new trial filed by
the plaintiff in the Penobscot County
case of Harry A. Thurston VS.. Mary
A. Nutter, was granted in another
rescript drawn by the same justice.
This rescript reads:
Action of assumpsit for services
rendered to and expenditures made
for defendant Plaintiff claimed the
defendant orally agreed that If he
would move upon her farm and care
for and support her during life, she
would give him a deed of the farm
and take from him a bond for sup
port secured by a mortgage on the
farm; that he moved to the farm and
performed for year, working him
self, hiring labor, furnishing supplies
and repairing buildings; that the
defendant refused to give the deed
and he left the farm. The defendant
claimed that there was an agree
ment to support her during life but
no agreement for giving a deed and
mortgage and that the plaintiff will
fully abandoned the contract Yer
dict for defendant. General motion
for new trial.
Held:
l. A contract partly in writing
and partly oral is parol contract
z. a parol contract to support one
during life is not within the statute
of frauds.
). Where one contracts to support
another during life and then COM
mlts breach of the contract that is
Wll1ui, purposeful or in bad faith he
cannot recover in an action on a
quantum meruit for the value of the
services rendered to or benefits con-
ferred by him on the other party.
4. Where contract to support is
not completed because the minds of
the parties do not meet and one
party renders services beneficial to
the other under circumstances that
negative the idea that the services
were gratultous and the party to
whom the services are rendered
knows it and permits it and accepts
the peneht, such party is bound to
pay reasonable compensation
therefor.
D. Such facts and circumstances
justify a presumption that the party
to whom the services are rendered
must have requested them and must
nave intended to pay for them and
therefore the law implies a promise
to pay for them.
D.. whether or not a contract was
made between the parties and, If so,
It's terms were questions Of fact for
the jury.
Z. The jury by their verdict must
have found that an agreement was
made as claimed by the defendant
and that 'the plaintiff wilfully
abandoned and broke it.
Upon careful examination of the
facts we are of the opinion that the
conclusions of the jury were not
authorized by the proof and that the
only authorized conclusion is that the
minds of the parties did not meet
and the contract was not completed
Motions sustained. New trial
granted.
Cumberland Case
In the Melcher case, coming from
Cumberland county and having to do
with lump settlement foA compen-
sation in an Industrial accident case
Justice Barnes rules against the ap-
peal of the plaintiff as follows:
After compensation has been paid
for more than six months, but before
petitioner had paid the physician who
ministered to her during GONZALES
cence, she filed a request for commu-
tation of future payments to lump
sum. Notice was given, hearing had
and the lump sum was ascertained and
paid,
Within so days of receipt of the
lump sum settlement, petitioner filed
a petition for determination of a sum
to be paid by her employer to defray
the expense of medical and surgical
aid incurred Immediately after the ac-
cident.
Respondents contend that by pay
ment of the lump sum, to which all
future payments We're committed
strictly in compliance with the law
their liability to petitioner was end
ed; while petitioner argues that medi-
cal aid and assistance is not com
pensation," as the word is used in
the section of statute above quoted
and that the expense incurred for
such aid and assistance is still recover
able upon petition.
The wording of the DbraSe under in