Dickensheets v. Patrick

• Decision Date: 07 July 1925
• Docket Number: No. 18723.,18723.
• Citation: 274 S.W. 891
• Parties: DICKENSHEETS v. PATRICK.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

274 S.W. 891

DICKENSHEETS v. PATRICK.

No. 18723.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

July 7, 1925.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Rails County; Charles T. Hays, Judge.

Action by Cora A. Diekensheets against Bessie Patrick, administratrix of the estate of John H. Canby, deceased. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

J. O. Allison and Joseph F. Barry, both of New London, for appellant.

Eby & Hulse, of Hannibal, and E. L. Alford, of Perry, for respondent.

DAUES, P. J.

This is an action for services performed by plaintiff for John H. Canby, deceased. The suit was filed in the circuit court of Ralls county by plaintiff against Bessie Patrick, as administratrix of the estate of said Canby. The cause was tried to a jury, resulting in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $904.90, and defendant appeals.

The petition alleges that plaintiff and Canby entered into a contract in 1893 whereby plaintiff was to care for, cook and serve meals, and do the washing for Canby in her home, and that Canby was to pay therefor the reasonable value of such services. It is alleged that plaintiff rendered the services according to the contract from December 1, 1893, to February 12, 1920 (several months excluded), covering a period of 1,322 weeks, and that $3 per week was the reasonable sum for such services, that plaintiff allowed a credit of $95.10, which the decedent paid on the contract from time to time during the 28 years, and that no further payments were made, and asked judgment against said estate for $3,870.10.

The answer is a general denial, and pleads the statute of limitation.

The record shows that Canby, a bachelor died intestate in December, 1921. In 1890 he was the owner of 125 acres of land in Rails county, and resided on same continuously until a few months before his death. In 1893 Samuel L. Dickensheets, the husband of plaintiff, with his family, moved to the Canby farm, and they have resided there continuously since. Canby lived in the house with the Dickensheets throughout the period of his residence on the farm after 1893. In 1905 Canby conveyed 62 acres of the land, including the residence, to Dickensheets and his wife. They gave a note to Canby for $300, secured by a deed of trust subject to a $1,700 deed of trust then on the place. On March 11, 1905, Canby and Samuel L. Dickensheets entered into a contract by which Canby rented to the Dickensheets the 62½ acres more of the farm for $100 a year, and agreed thereby that Mr. Dickensheets was to furnish Canby board and meals and washing for $80 a year, the contract to run for 10 years. It appears that settlements were made between Samuel Dickensheets and Canby yearly under this contract. In April, 1916, the deed of trust, given by the Dickensheets on March 11, 1905, to secure the $300 note, was released, and a new deed of trust was given to secure the note of Dickensheets and his wife to Canby for $600. Other real estate transactions were shown involving Canby's real estate holdings. There is evidence that the estate of Canby paid Samuel L. Dickensheets $334.60 for board and firewood furnished Canby from February 12 to September 9, 1921. There is also evidence that Canby carried a small account in two local banks. At his death, Canby's estate was worth about $5,000.

In the contract made in 1893 it was agreed that Canby was to live with the Dickensheets family, and that he should have and occupy a certain room in the house. There is evidence that Canby at that time asked Dickensheets what board he was to pay, and requested that since he was hard run for money he would like board as cheaply as possible. Dickensheets replied that he did not want to make any profit off of him, and that he would charge him only what it would cost to buy the food he ate. After some conversation it was concluded that it would cost about $80 a year, or about 7 1/3 cents per meal, to cover the net amount required for food. During this same conversation, Dickensheets told Canby that the $80 per year would not include the services of his wife, plaintiff herein, for preparing the meals, keeping his room clean, doing his washing, and mending his clothes, and that Canby would have to make some arrangements with his wife for those services. Plaintiff testified that she was present during this conversation, and that Canby then asked her what she would charge him for her services so to be rendered, and that she told him she did not know but that she would be fair and reasonable in her charges; that Canby agreed that he would pay what was reasonable and right.

The evidence shows that, after the arrangements were finally made between Canby and the Dickensheets, Canby continued to live there as a member of the family, and that plaintiff continued to perform such services for Canby under the terms of said agreement from 1893 until 1920. It appears that the contract by which Dickensheets was to buy the food for Canby for $80 a year ran on until February, 1920, when a new arrangement was made between the Dickensheets and Canby, whereby Canby was to pay the sum of $4 per week for his board, which was to cover all charges for his meals and keeping his room clean, etc. They lived under this agreement until September 9, 1921, when Canby left the home of plaintiff.

While the evidence shows several real estate transactions by Canby, and that he had a small bank account, there is evidence tending to show that he was a man of very little ready cash. For several years after he began living with the Dickensheets he paid $180 annually for the care of an invalid sister, and he also loaned sums of money to relatives, and there is testimony tending to show that Canby was usually hard pressed for money, and that on several occasions he told the plaintiff he could not then pay for the services rendered by her because of his impecunious condition. On a number of occasions Canby would buy certain articles of merchandise at the request of plaintiff, and he would tell her to keep track of such accounts and give him credit on what he was owing for her services to him. He made a few cash payments of $20 and less, and plaintiff kept account of such payments, together with the articles he bought for her, aggregating the sum of $95.10.

The jury having before it the decedent's real estate and financial...