Lawler v. Stanford

RICE, Judge.

We have no : fault to find with appellants’ proposition of law No. 1, upon which all their counsel’s argument is based, to wit: “Where, in the absence of an expressed contract, valuable services are rendered by one person to another, which are knowingly accepted, the law will assume an obligation to pay for such services what they are reasonably worth.” McFarland v. Dawson, 125 Ala. 428, 29 So. 327; Irvin v.. Strother, 163 Ala. 484, 50 So. 969. But this principle does not apply to improvements on leased land voluntarily made by the lessee. Alabama & Southern Digest, vol. 18,…