## Facts

- Hugh Mooney (decedent) lived for several years in the household of Michael Gay, who was married to Mooney’s niece.
- Gay provided Mooney with board and lodging during that period.
- After Mooney died, Gay sought payment from the estate for the reasonable value of the board and lodging.
- Gay introduced evidence of an understanding that Mooney would devise a specified dwelling house to Gay’s children in exchange for being supported as a member of the family.
- Mooney died without making the promised devise.
- The trial court entered judgment for Gay against the estate; the administrator sought review by writ of error.

## Issues

1. In a family household setting, what showing is required to overcome the presumption that board and lodging were furnished gratuitously?
2. May an unenforceable oral agreement to devise land be admitted to show an expectation of compensation and support recovery in quantum meruit despite the Statute of Frauds?

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the judgment for Gay.
- The court held the evidence of the understanding to devise a house was admissible to rebut the presumption that the services were gratuitous.
- The court held that, although the oral bargain to devise land could not be enforced at law, Gay could recover the reasonable value of the services on a quantum meruit theory.

## Legal Principles

- When services are rendered within a household or family-type relationship, they are presumed to be gratuitous unless a reasonable expectation of compensation is shown.
- Evidence showing an understanding of compensation may be admitted to rebut the gratuity presumption, even if the contemplated consideration involves an interest in land.
- An oral agreement relating to land that is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds cannot be the basis of an action to enforce the land transfer.
- When services are rendered in performance of an unenforceable bargain, the service provider’s legal remedy is an action in quantum meruit for the reasonable value of the services.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed a judgment awarding compensation for board and lodging where evidence of an expected devise was properly used to show the services were not intended as a gratuity, and where recovery was allowed in quantum meruit even though the oral promise to devise land was unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds.


Gay v. Mooney, 67 N.J.L. 27 (N.J. Sup. Ct. 1901)