Mills v. Joiner

Citations

• 20 Fla. 479

Syllabus

<p>1. It is error to receive in evidence the statement of a party made in his own behalf to a third person, without in any way connecting the other party therewith, as it furnishes no legal proof of the facts claimed to exist, by reason of such evidence. Especially is it error when such evidence has a tendency to mislead the minds of the jury in coming to a correct conclusion,</p> <p>2. It is a well established principle that hearsay evidence “ is held incompetent to establish any specific fact, which in its nature is susceptible of being proved by witnesses who can speak from their own knowledge.”</p> <p>3. It is a presumption of law, that the father is not bound to pay a child, though of full age, for services while living with him at home, and as one of the family, but this presumption may be overcome by proof of a special contract, or an express or implied promise or understanding ; and such implied promise or understanding may be inferred from the facts and circumstances shown in the evidence.</p> <p>4. The plaintiff, a female of full age, agreed to work for her father, as she testifies, during his life, or until she was discharged-; that the father agreed to convey her a certain piece of land as compensation for her services. The agreement was not in writing ; she so worked for her father for twelve years ; he then discharged her, and conveyed the land to a third person. She brings an action at law for her servie'es. The court instructed the jury in substance that the plaintiff could only recover the land, or the value of it, and if there was no evidence of the value of the land, the verdict should be for the defendant: Held, to be error. The agreement not being in writing, and being for the conveyance of land, she could not maintain an action for specific performance, but could upon a qurndum meruit.</p>