# Lipe v. Citizens Bank & Trust Co.

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · February 27, 1935 · 207 N.C. 794

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3641955

## Case

- **Full name:** CHARLES H. LIPE v. CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** February 27, 1935
- **Citations:** 207 N.C. 794; 178 S.E. 665; 1935 N.C. LEXIS 269
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Stacy
- **Judges:** Stacy
- **Cited by:** 14 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3641955

## Opinion text

Stacy, C. J.
This is tbe same case that was before us at tbe Fall Term, 1933, opinion filed 28 February, 1934, and reported in 206 N. C., 24 , 173 S. E., 316 .
It is established by tbe decisions in this jurisdiction:
1. That when services are performed under an oral agreement, express or implied, that compensation is to be provided therefor in tbe will of tbe party receiving tbe benefit, and no such provision is made, an action will lie to recover for tbe breach, or to prevent an unjust enrichment, if
*796
need be, on the part of the recipient of such services.
Grantham v. Grantham,
205 N. C., 363 , 171 S. E., 331 ;
Hager v. Whitener,
204 N. C., 747 , 169 S. E., 645 ;
Redmon v. Roberts,
198 N. C., 161 , 150 S. E., 881 ;
Brown v. Williams,
196 N. C., 247 , 145 S. E., 233 ;
Deal v. Wilson,
178 N. C., 600 , 101 S. E., 205 ;
Patterson v. Franklin,
168 N. C., 75 , 84 S. E., 18 ;
Whetstine v. Wilson,
104 N. C., 385 , 10 S. E., 471 ;
Miller v. Lash,
85 N. C., 52 .
2. That the cause of action accrues at the time of default, which may arise from abandonment or anticipatory breach
(Shore v. Holt,
185 N. C., 312 , 117 S. E., 165 ), but which usually results from failure to make testamentary provision as promised.
Harrison v. Sluder,
197 N. C., 76 , 147 S. E., 684 ;
Fertilized Co. v. Eason,
194 N. C., 244 , 139 S. E., 376 ;
Brown v. Williams, supra; Patterson v. Franklin, supra; Helsabeck v. Doub,
167 N. C., 205 , 83 S. E., 241 ;
Freeman v. Brown,
151 N. C., 111 , 65 S. E., 743 ;
Whetstine v. Wilson, supra; Miller v. Lash, supra.
3. That the measure of damages, or recoverable compensation, on facts such ,as disclosed by the present record, is the reasonable value of the services rendered.
Grantham v. Grantham, supra; Nesbitt v. Donoho,
198 N. C., 147 , 150 S. E., 875 ;
Patterson v. Franklin, supra; Haircloth v. Kenlaw,
165 N. C., 228 , 81 S. E., 299 ; 25 R. C. L., 307.
Applying these principles, as gleaned from the authorities, to the facts of the instant case, it would seem that the rulings, both as to the measure of recovery and the statute of limitations, are amply supported by the decisions. Nothing was said in
Hayman v. Davis,
182 N. C., 563 , 109 S. E., 554 , or in
McCurry v. Purgason,
170 N. C., 463 , 87 S. E. 244 , which militates against any of the conclusions above stated, but, in reality, all that was said in these cases, when properly interpreted, fully accords with said conclusions. The verdict and judgment will be upheld.
No error.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3641955. Public record. Not legal advice.