Lee v. McCrocklin's Adm'r

• Decision Date: 20 January 1933
• Citation: 247 Ky. 44,56 S.W.2d 570
• Parties: LEE v. McCROCKLIN'S ADM'R.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

56 S.W.2d 570

247 Ky. 44

LEE v. McCROCKLIN'S ADM'R.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

January 20, 1933

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Common Pleas Branch First Division.

Action by Sadie M. Lee against Mary Lee McCrocklin's administrator with will annexed. From an adverse judgment plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Mark Beauchamp, of Louisville, for appellant.

Shackelford Miller, Jr., of Louisville, for appellee.

DRURY C.

Sadie Miller Lee sued the administrator with will annexed of Mary Lee McCrocklin for $12,000 alleged to be due her on an oral contract made with Mrs. McCrocklin, her petition was dismissed, and she has appealed. The substance of this petition is:

"Plaintiff states that heretofore, about the years 1890 and 1891 the said Mary Lee McCrocklin, then Mary Lee Farnsley, entered into an agreement with this plaintiff under the terms of which the said Mary Lee Farnsley promised and agreed to leave, will and devise to the plaintiff herein all the estate of the said Mary Lee Farnsley for and in consideration of the services which had been rendered to said Mary Lee Farnsley by this plaintiff and in consideration of the assistance rendered to the said Mary Lee Farnsley by this plaintiff, and in consideration of the love and affection which the said Mary Lee Farnsley had for this plaintiff and in consideration of further services and assistance which the plaintiff agreed to render to said Mary Lee Farnsley, and that at said time both the plaintiff herein and Mary Lee Farnsley were sui juris. Plaintiff states that she continued to furnish said services and assistance to the said Mary Lee Farnsley during the remainder of the life of said Mary Lee Farnsley, who subsequently married one Isaac McCrocklin, taking the said name of McCrocklin, which was the name of the said Mary Lee Farnsley McCrocklin at the time of her death, which occurred in January, 1930.

Plaintiff states that as a further evidence of the intention and purpose of said Mary Lee McCrocklin, then Farnsley, to carry out and fulfill her agreement with this plaintiff to will and devise to this plaintiff all of the estate of said Mary Lee Farnsley, the said Mary Lee Farnsley did on the 4th day of May, 1891, prepare in her own hand writing a last will and testament in which she devised to this plaintiff the entire remainder of the estate of said Mary Lee Farnsley, subject to a few minor bequests, and in order to assure the plaintiff of the intention of said Mary Lee Farnsley to comply with and abide by said agreement, the said Mary Lee Farnsley delivered said will to this plaintiff with the assurance to this plaintiff that said will would not be changed and that this plaintiff should hold same as assurance and security for the said Mary Lee Farnsley complying with the said agreement, and that this plaintiff did hold and preserve and keep said will believing same to be a good will and a binding contract, and that this plaintiff during all of said time fully and faithfully complied with her agreement with and promise to the said Mary Lee Farnsley to help, aid and assist the the said Mary Lee Farnsley in all manner and things in which plaintiff could aid or assist, and that the services rendered by this plaintiff to the said Mary Lee Farnsley, afterwards Mary Lee McCrocklin, covered a period of forty years and until and after the death of the said Mary Lee Farnsley McCrocklin in January, 1930, this plaintiff believing at all times that she would receive the property of the said Mary Lee Farnsley, later McCrocklin, in accordance with the said agreement and the will which this plaintiff at all times retained, believing same to be a good and valid will and binding contract. ***

Plaintiff states that the services...