
    Hurst et al., executors, v. Lane.
    Argued June 14,
    Decided July 22, 1898.
    Complaint. Before Judge Hutcbins. Walton superior •court. August term, 1897.
    
      W. 8. Upshaw, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      Foster & Butler, contra.
   Lumpkin, P. J.

There being evidence to warrant a finding that the plaintiff below, in the capacity of a servant, rendered to her deceased uncle and to his wife services for which payment was contemplated, and that these services were not exclusively such as would be prompted by affection and a sense of duty, she was entitled to a recovery against his executors; and having, under the court’s direction, written off a portion of the verdict returned in her favor, the ■same, as thus amended, was not excessive in amount. See Murrell v. Studstill, 104 Ga. 604.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.  