Skip to main content
· 7/18/1912

Hatfield's Estate

Citations

  • 50 Pa. Super. 450
  • 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 73

Syllabus

<p>Decedents’ estates — Claim for services — Housekeeper—Domestic service — Family relation — Presumption of payment.</p> <p>A claim against a decedent’s estate for services as housekeeper will not be sustained where it appears that there was no express contract to pay for such services, that the claimant was a sister-in-law of the decedent, and that she lived in the family of the decedent and performed the ordinary services of a domestic in the household. The presumption of payment of the wages of domestics at stated periods is applicable to such a case.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a habeas court could intervene to stop the transfer of slaves where “there [was] no law which [would] warrant ... their fore ible detention or forcible removal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bice, Head, Henderson, Mokkison, Morrison, Orlady, Porter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.