Fritz v. Hartman

Citations

• 70 Pa. Super. 434
• 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 270

Syllabus

<p>Decedents’ estates — Claim for services — Board—Contract.</p> <p>Where several adult children arrange with their father that he should come and stay with each of them alternately under a stipulation on his part that he should pay no board, a son-in-law cannot after the death of his father-in-law claim from the latter’s estate for board furnished and services rendered, without showing- that the latter had agreed to a termination of the arrangement which he had made with his children. Letters written by the son-in-law to some of the children urging them to fa a price for the decedent’s board, are not admissible, to charge the decedent’s estate with the board claimed by the son-in-law.</p> <p>In such a ease the fact that the father was feeble-minded is immaterial as some one could have been appointed to act for him.</p>