Merrick v. Ditzler

Citations

• 91 Ohio St. (N.S.) 256

Syllabus

<p>Contracts — Compensation for services by member of family — No implied obligation, when — Express contract necessary, when — ■ Facts and degree of proof to establish recovery — Written or parol contracts.</p> <p>1. In an action to recover compensation for services when it ■ appears that the plaintiff was a member of the family of the person for whom the services were rendered, no obligation to pay for the services will be implied, and the plaintiff cannot recover in such case unless it be established that there was an express contract upon the one side to perform the services for. compensation and upon the other side to accept the services and pay for them.</p> <p>2. Such contract may be in writing or it may rest entirely in parol and it may be proved by direct or indirect evidence. If the defense is made by the personal representatives of a deceased person, the contract, whether in writing or parol, must be established by clear and convincing proof.</p> <p>3. Where the party who is alleged to have made such express contract is a living person, defendant in the suit and competent to testify, it is sufficient in order to entitle the plaintiff to recover that the contract, whether in writing or in parol, be established by the preponderance of the evidence. {Hinkle et al., Exrs., v. Sage, 67 Ohio St., 256, distinguished.)</p>