Vito v. McDonald

SCHOTTKY, J. Cyril McDonald, as the administrator of the estate of Louis R. Battro, deceased, appeals from a judg[510]ment in favor of Minnie M. Vito in an action brought by her to recover for the reasonable value of services rendered to the decedent during his lifetime.

An agreed statement of facts discloses that Louis Battro came to live with the Vito family in 1932. He lived with them continuously until 1945 when the Vitos moved from their residence at 130 Virginia Street in Vallejo to a smaller home located at 702 Springs Road, Vallejo. Mr. Battro continued to live at the Virginia Street address and paid rent to the new occupant until 1953 when the Vitos moved into another home in which they had room for Mr. Battro. Thereafter, he again lived with the Vitos until his death in 1957.

Mr. Battro was unemployed for most of the period of the 1930's. At the beginning of World War II he secured employment at the naval shipyard at Mare Island. He then promised Mrs. Vito that if she would permit him to live with her family as he had in the past she would receive all of his insurance and retirement benefits at his death. During the war Mr. Battro paid Mrs. Vito approximately $30 per month for room and board.

After Mr. Battro returned to the Vito household in 1953, he reaffirmed his earlier promise that he would take care of Mrs. Vito at his death and reassured her that she had been made the beneficiary of his insurance policies and retirement benefits. Apparently Mr. Battro also paid $30 per month during this period.

During the period Mr. Battro lived with the Vitos he was treated as a member of the family. Mrs. Vito did his laundry and sewing. She took care of him when he was ill.

Mr. Battro died intestate. He had not made Mrs. Vito the beneficiary of his life insurance policies or his retirement benefits. She filed a claim against his estate, and, after it was rejected, she brought this action to recover for the reasonable value of the services rendered. The trial court awarded her $2,500 and the public administrator as the administrator of Mr. Battro's estate has appealed.

The principal contention urged by appellant is that the court erred in not invoking the statute of limitations for the period of time from 1932 to 1945. Appellant contends that this portion of the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. In Rooney v. Sullivan, 169 Cal.App.2d 432 [337 P.2d 543] (hearing denied), it was held that where services are rendered under an oral agreement to compensate the person performing the services by the will of the promisor