
    Frank J. Peck, Respondent, v. Ella J. Sands, Appellant.
    
      Contract —■ action to recover for alleged services in doing the work of defendant as executor of her mother's estate.
    
    
      Peck v. Sands, 207 App. Div. 879, affirmed.
    (Argued April 8, 1924;
    decided May 13, 1924.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment, entered November 26, 1923, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, which unanimously reversed an order of the court at a Trial Term setting aside a verdict in favor of plaintiff and granting a new trial and reinstated said verdict. The action was brought to recover $1,394.78 with interest from May 20, 1920, for services in looking after the interests of plaintiff in the settlement of her mother’s estate and doing her part of the work as one of the executors of said estate, upon an alleged promise of defendant that if plaintiff would so look after defendant’s interests and do said work defendant would pay plaintiff the fees which she got as one of said executors. The trial justice set aside the verdict “ upon the ground that the contract for the services sued for in said action was malum in se and void as against public policy and that there can be no recovery for such services upon an implied contract or upon a quantum meruit.”
    
    
      Louis L. Waters for appellant.
    
      Clayton R. Lusk for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur; Hiscock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.  