Hardy v. Dillon
| Decision Date | 12 January 1948 |
| Docket Number | 40424 |
| Citation | 207 S.W.2d 276 |
| Parties | Luther L. Hardy, Respondent, v. William S. Dillon, Administrator of the Estate of Julia A. Slayden, Deceased, Defendant, Leygia Bailey, alias Leygia Bailey Dixon; Bernice Bailey, alias Bernice Bailey Hudson; Inez Bailey, alias Inez Bailey Barr; Jane Louise Bailey, alias Jane Louise Bailey Brewer; Maud Hardy, alias Maud Hardy Barrett; and Vance E. Hardy, Appellants |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
From the Circuit Court of Stoddard County, Civil Appeal, Judge James V. Billings
Reversed and Remanded
In this action against Julia A. Slayden's administrator and heirs Luther L. Hardy contends that he and Mrs. Slayden entered into an oral contract by which Mrs. Slayden agreed to will him all her property upon her death in consideration of certain personal services. Mrs. Slayden having breached the contract and died intestate and Hardy having performed the services asks that the contract be specifically enforced by the court's decreeing him to be her sole distributee to the exclusion of her other nieces and nephews. The essence of his claim is contained in the allegation that in 1939, Mrs Slayden showing the infirmities of age and being unable to properly supervise or maintain her property, "the plaintiff agreed to obtain a leave of absence from his position with a railroad company in the State of Pennsylvania as often as he could (amended from "at least twice a year") in the Spring and in the Fall, and to return to Morehouse, Missouri, and stay at least a month each time, or so long as was necessary, for the plaintiff to aid the said Julia A. Slayden in the proper repair, maintenance upkeep and conduct of her business and personal affairs" in return for which Mrs. Slayden agreed to make a will leaving all her property to him.
The trial court found that the contract was made as alleged, that the plaintiff had performed the services and fulfilled his part of the agreement and that "there is no way to adequately compensate the plaintiff for his services under the contract" without granting specific performance. Consequently the court decreed Hardy to be the sole and only distributee of Mrs. Slayden's $15,257.64 estate.
It may be assumed for the purposes of this opinion that the plaintiff proved a contract and that he performed certain services pursuant to the contract and yet it does not follow as a matter of course that he is entitled to the broad equitable relief analogous to specific performance. Such inclusive, comprehensive relief is not a matter of right even though there has been performance by the promisee. Hunter v. Lafferty, (Mo.) 162 S.W. 2d 842. Each case must be decided upon its own facts (Ver Standig v. St. Louis Union Trust Co., 344 Mo. 880, 885, 129 S.W. 2d 905, 907) and even though the cause is otherwise meritorious if the services rendered were not exceptional and substantial, personal, filial, or arduous and menial, and could readily and easily be measured and compensated in money specific performance should be denied and the plaintiff compelled to accept the reasonable value of his services. Schebaum v. Mersman, (Mo.) 191 S.W. 2d 671; Feigenspan v. Pence, 350 Mo. 821, 168 S.W. 2d 1074; Herman v. Madden, 349 Mo. 447, 162 S.W. 2d 268; Dieckmann v. Madden, 349 Mo. 312, 160 S.W. 2d 724; Selle v. Selle, 337 Mo. 1234, 88 S.W. 2d 877. The respondent, recognizing this question as the merits of this appeal, urges that the services here rendered were of a peculiarly personal and domestic nature which could not be measured by ordinary pecuniary standards or adequately compensated in any other action. Ver Standig v. St. Louis Union Trust Co., supra; Berg v. Moreau, 199 Mo. 416, 97 S.W. 901.
In 1939 Mrs. Slayden, widow since 1921 of Dr. Slayden of Dexter, lived in Morehouse. She owned and operated the Forrest Hotel. She also owned other property in Morehouse as well as in Dexter. In 1939 she was seventy years old, a Christian Scientist, and for her years in good health. The plaintiff was fifty-four and had been employed by railroads in Pennsylvania since 1917. In 1939 he was an engineer earning $300 a month. In that year in May Mr. and Mrs. Hardy were in Morehouse for two weeks and it was during that visit that the contract resulted. In the beginning his Aunt Julia wanted them to move to Morehouse and take over the hotel and operate it but because of his long service with the railroad he could not give up his seniority and retirement rights, consequently that suggested arrangement was abandoned. Instead it was finally agreed that they should come back as often as he could get a leave of absence or a vacation, or twice a year, and he could "do the general work around there" and his wife could do the housework, cooking and washing. His "part was to help her do the work and taking her on business trips."
Pursuant to the agreement made in May 1939 Mr. and Mrs. Hardy returned to Morehouse in the spring of 1940. They stayed "about a month that time," and again in the fall of 1940 they stayed another month. In the spring and fall of 1941 they returned for another two months. And again in the spring and fall of 1942 and 1943 they returned for a month's stay each trip. In 1944, because of his inability to get a leave of absence, they made but one trip of a month's duration. In 1945 they made two trips, the second one of about six weeks' duration. On February 8, 1946, rather suddenly and unexpectedly, Mrs. Slayden died.
On the first trip Mrs. Hardy took over the kitchen work, prepared the meals "and first one thing and another" while Mr. Hardy took Mrs. Slayden on business trips,...
To continue reading
Request your trial