Borum v. Bell

• Citation: 132 Ala. 85,31 So. 454
• Parties: BORUM v. BELL.
• Decision Date: 13 February 1902
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

31 So. 454

132 Ala. 85

BORUM v. BELL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 13, 1902

Appeal from probate court, Pike county; W. R. White, Judge.

Proceedings between Joseph Bell, administrator, and T. L. Borum guardian. From the decree, Borum appeals. Reversed.

Worthy & Gardner. for appellant.

Foster Samford & Carroll, for appellee.

HARALSON J.

1. It is true that a person who assumes to act as guardian of a lunatic or person non compos mentis, without an inquisition of lunacy, and without proper authority, may be charged as a trustee in invitum and compelled to account in a court of chancery. Moody v. Bibb, 50 Ala. 245; Whetstone v. Whetstone's Ex'rs, 75 Ala. 496.

It is however, well settled, that an adult person, who is of unsound mind, can become liable by implied contract for necessaries suitable to his estate and condition in life; and where such necessaries are furnished to him, a legal liability rests upon him to pay for them, which would be a debt chargeable on his estate. Ex parte Northington, 37 Ala 496, 79 Am. Dec. 67; Davis v. Tarver, 65 Ala. 99.

2. Voucher No. 1 objected to by the guardian is as follows:

The Estate of G. W. Killgore to Joseph Bell and Wife, Dr.

To board, washing, fuel and attention in the years 1895, 1896, 1897,

of Mr. G. W. Killgore, at $5.00 per month,--34 months ............... $170 00

To board, washing, fuel and attention in the years 1895, 1896, 1897,

of Mrs. G. W. Killgore, at $5.00 per month,--34 months ............... 170 00

_______

$334 00

Cr.

By net balance of rent, after paying doctor's bill and

medicines in the year 1895 ................................... 52 62

By net balance of rent after paying doctor's bill and med. in

the year 1896 ................................................ 73 50

_____ 126 12

W6D

$207 88

It is objected, that said claim fails to show in what manner the estate of G. W. Killgore is liable to said Joseph Bell and wife; that it fails to give the dates, or the time when board, washing, fuel and attention were given and rendered G W. Killgore and wife, when the same began and ended, for each of the years therein specified; that said voucher, 1, fails to state when rent was received by said Joseph Bell and wife, for the years 1895 and 1896, and was indefinite as to the doctor's bills, medicines and the amounts thereof for each year; that the voucher fails to account for rents for the years 1897 and 1898 or to state what became of them, and that the account for board, etc., for 1895 is barred by the statute of limitations.

The claim, it must be admitted, is very indefinite in description, but technical accuracy, or the certainty of description essential in pleading is not required. Claims against estates are often made out and presented by unskilled persons, and generally, no more is required, than to inform the personal representative, on an inspection of it, of the nature, character and amount of the claim, and must distinguish it with reasonable certainty from all other similar claims. Floyd v. Clayton, 67 Ala. 265; Parker v. Bank, 121 Ala. 517, 25 So. 1001. The presentation "need not be in any particular form, provided it be sufficiently definite to notify the administrator of its character and amount, and enable him to make provision for its payment." 5 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 217. This claim was against the estate of G. W. Killgore, shows to whom it was payable, what for, the years for which the services and necessaries were furnished, and the number of months. It was properly verified by Joseph Bell, one of the claimants, and filed in proper time in the office of the probate judge, as required by section 129 of the Code. It must be held not to have been insufficient in definiteness. What is said as to the sufficiency of this claim for presentation applies also to the claim of Alex. Jones,--voucher No. 4.

3. Mrs Bell was examined as a witness to prove voucher No. 1, and testified that she was the granddaughter of Mr. and Mrs. G. W. Killgore, deceased; that about September, 1894, her grandparents came to her house and stayed there continuously until July, 1897, when they left and went to their daughter's, Mrs. F. C. Brown, in Columbus, Ga. The guardian objected to this evidence, on the ground that she was interested in the result of the suit, and the evidence sought to establish a transaction between the witness and the deceased. The objection was not well taken. The witness was not testifying to a transaction with deceased, but to a fact, open to the observation of other persons as well as to herself,--open and apparent to the public, and about which any person, knowing the fact might testify, without touching any transaction between deceased and the witness. The fact deposed to, could not be said to be particularly within the knowledge of the deceased, and...