Howard v. Randolph
| Citation | 68 S.E. 586,134 Ga. 691 |
| Parties | HOWARD et al. v. RANDOLPH. |
| Decision Date | 28 June 1910 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Georgia |
Syllabus by the Court.
A person assuming the parental character and discharging parental duties to a minor child, received into his family as a child and not as a servant, stands in loco parentis to such child.
Where a person assumes the relation of a parent to a child not of kin, which he takes from an orphanage at the tender age of three years, and faithfully discharges the duties of that relation by receiving such child into his family and educating and supporting her as if she had been his own child, and where there is no express agreement to pay wages to the child, she cannot maintain an action against the executors of the person who stood in loco parentis for services rendered while a minor, although the value of the services may exceed the expenses of such education and support.
One who has been received in infancy as a child into a family not of kin to her, and remains in the household after her majority and then seeks to recover for services rendered to such family after majority, has the burden of proof to show either an express contract or circumstances from which a contract to compensate for such services may be implied.
In elucidating the question whether such services were rendered gratuitously or under an implied promise of compensation evidence relating to the character and extent of the services, the declarations and conduct of the recipient, the value of the services, and corresponding benefits to the recipient is admissible.
Error from Superior Court, Jackson County; C. H. Brand, Judge.
Action by M. M. Randolph against W. C. Howard and others, executors of J. E. Randolph. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Reversed.
J. A B. Mahaffey and Jno. J. Strickland, for plaintiffs in error.
J. S Ayers and H. H. Dean, for defendant in error.
This is a suit to recover upon a quantum meruit $3,949 principal, besides interest, for services alleged to have been rendered to J. E. Randolph, the defendants' testator. The greater part of the recovery sought is claimed for services alleged to have been rendered during the plaintiff's minority. The jury rendered a verdict in her favor for $3,240.10 principal and $929.50 interest. The plaintiff voluntarily wrote off from the amount of interest recovered $343.60. The court refused the defendants a new trial.
We gather from the record that J. E. Randolph, who was without children, and whose household consisted of himself and wife, about the year 1885 took the plaintiff, then child of about three years, from an orphanage, and received her into his household as a member of his family, where she remained until his death in 1905. Though of no kin to her, he gave to her his surname, maintained and educated her, and in all respects treated her as a daughter and a member of his household. He was a man in easy circumstances, always provided his household with two servants, and the plaintiff was not called upon to discharge any domestic services, except as are usually rendered by a daughter under like circumstances. Her education was not confined to the elementary branches of a common-school education, but she was taught music and art, and graduated from an institution of learning about the year 1899. After her graduation in 1899 she taught school five months, and again taught school in 1901 about five months. She was teaching school in 1905, when, about the 1st of February, she was summoned to the beside of Mrs. Randolph, who died about a month later, and about a month thereafter Mr. Randolph died. Mr. Randolph owned several small tenant houses near a factory, some storehouses, and some land. He also conducted an undertaking business in Jefferson, a town of 1,500 or 1,800 population. When the plaintiff was about 12 or 14 years of age, she began to assist Mr. Randolph in dressing coffins as he would sell them, and she assisted in collecting the rents from the small houses, and in keeping his accounts with respect to these matters. To what extent she assisted in the collection of rents, and the character of the accounts which she and Mr. Randolph kept appertaining to the rent and undertaking business, does not appear with much precision in the record. Mr. Randolph was accustomed to use intoxicants, and sometimes got drunk, and the plaintiff always administered unto his wants on these occasions. Whenever Mrs. Randolph was sick, she would nurse her. Mr. Randolph left an estate of about $60,000, and in his will bequeathed to the plaintiff $1,000 in cash and a third interest in the undertaking business, from which she realized $450. The whole evidence tended to show that the relations between the plaintiff and Mr. Randolph and his wife were cordial, and such as might be expected between parent and child. No hint of unkind, disrespectful, or inconsiderate treatment from one to the other is suggested.
1, 2. Until majority the child remains under the control of the father, who is entitled to its services and the proceeds of its labor. Civ. Code, § 2502. Likewise one who stands in loco parentis to such a child is entitled to the proceeds of its labor, and is bound for its care, maintenance, and support. Eaves v. Fears, 131 Ga. 820, 64 S.E. 269. A person who...
To continue reading
Request your trial