Potter v. Clark

• Decision Date: 13 October 1948
• Docket Number: 234
• Citation: 49 S.E.2d 636,229 N.C. 350
• Parties: POTTER v. CLARK.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

49 S.E.2d 636

229 N.C. 350

POTTER v. CLARK.

No. 234

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 13, 1948

This was an action to recover for personal services rendered defendant's intestate. There was verdict for plaintiff, and from judgment thereon, defendant appealed.

George E. Hood, of Goldsboro, for plaintiff-appellee.

J Faison Thomson and Roy M. Sasser, both of Goldsboro, for defendant-appellant.

DEVIN Justice.

The evidence in this case unfolded an unusual background. In 1927, when the plaintiff was one year old, his mother Cora Mitchell was fatally injured in an automobile accident and the child was taken into the home of his maternal grandfather Thomas Potter, and his second wife Marquette Potter. The boy's name was changed to Grover Potter, and he lived in this home until his grandfather died in 1938, and thereafter he continued to live in the home with his foster grandmother Marquette Potter, except for about eight months in 1945, when he was in military service of the United States. He assisted his grandmother in the operation of a small grocery store. On the 4th day of June, 1946, Marquette Potter, in contemplation of a second marriage, and desiring to make some provision for Grover, executed a will in which she devised to him and his child a house and lot in Goldsboro, and on June 7th she married Will C. Chase, and the following day, June 8th, she suddenly became ill, and died that night. In accordance with the statute, G.S. s 31-6, the attempted will was declared void as having been revoked by her subsequent marriage, and the intended devise to Grover Potter lapsed. The house and lot, together with all other property of Marquette Potter Chase, passed to her daughter Belia Smith Clark who qualified as administratrix of her estate. Thereafter the plaintiff Grover Potter filed claim with the administratrix for compensation for services rendered the intestate, and when his claim was rejected instituted this action therefor.

The plaintiff offered evidence tending to show that valuable services were rendered the decedent by the plaintiff, that she manifested her intention that payment be made therefor and that the services were rendered and accepted in expectation of compensation. Evidence was also offered as to the reasonable value of the services. The defendant's evidence tended to minimize the value of any services rendered, and to show that the care and maintenance of the plaintiff and payments made him more than compensated him for services rendered. The jury, however, accepted the plaintiff's view, and answered the issue in his favor awarding him $1,200 compensation for his services for three years next preceding the death of the intestate.

Defendant's motion for judgment of nonsuit was properly...