Services rendered between members of the same family form a common example of services rendered as a gratuity. Persons who live together as members of the same family, and render personal services each to the other, generally do so from motives of affection and not because of the expectation of a financial reward therefor. Accordingly, the mere rendition of personal services between persons so situated, does not establish a liability on the part of the person receiving such services to make compensation to the person rendering them, even though the services may be performed at the express request of the person receiving the benefit thereof or may be voluntarily accepted by him.1

43 Moore v. Ellis, 89 Wis. 108; 61 N. W. 291.

44 Boardman v. Ward, 40 Minn. 399; 12 Am. St. Rep. 749; 42 N. W. 202.

1 Morris v. Simpson, 3 Houst. (Del.) 568; Poole v. Baggett, 110 Ga. 822; 36 S. E. 86; Collar v. Patterson, 137 111. 403; 27 N. E. 604; Stock v. Stoltz, 137 111. 349; 27 N.

Conversely, no recovery can be had by the party to such relationship who furnishes board and lodging.2 This principle is sometimes spoken of as an exception to the general rule that liability exists where services for which compensation is usually made, are rendered by one person to another at the previous request of such other, or are voluntarily accepted by him. It is not, however, properly speaking, an exception to that rule, because such services as are here described, are not ordinarily the subject of compensation. It is rather an illustration of the principle that services rendered for which the party rendering them does not expect to make a charge, and accepted by the person for whom they are rendered with that understanding, do not create a legal liability.