Contracts — Oral Contract for Personal Services — Action for Breach—Blood Relationship Between Parties.—In an action for breach of an alleged oral contract by the defendant to support the plaintiff for life, in consideration of the rendering of certain personal services, where there is a blood relationship between the parties, it may well, be inferred, in the absence of a direct understanding to the contrary, that pecuniary compensation was not expected by the one performing the services.

Id.—Existence of Contract—Evidence.—In this action, in which the plaintiff and defendant were brothers, there is no evidence of such a direct understanding between the parties as to the performance of services and compensation therefor as conclusively shows any contract between them.

Id.—Conflict of Evidence — Nonexistence of Contract — Finding Sustained.—There being a substantial conflict in the evidence, the finding of the trial court that there was no such contract must be sustained.

Findings—Immaterial Issue.—A judgment will not be reversed because of the refusal of the trial court to find upon an immaterial allegation of the complaint.

Trial—Reopening -Case — Denial of Motion — Discretion of Trial Court.—The reopening of a case to allow further testimony to be submitted is usually a matter of discretion with the tria] court.

Id.—Refusal to Compel Production of Written Evidence — Subsequent Production.-—Error, if any, in refusing to compel the production of a certain letter was cured by its subsequent introduction in evidence.

Action for Services—Variance.—Where the plaintiff counted on an express contract for services, an objection to his testifying as to the reasonable value of his services was properly sustained.

Id.—Refusing Leave to Amend.—Where, in such case, it appeared that the plaintiff had no contract, the refusal of the court to grant him leave to amend Ms complaint by adding a count for the reasonable value of his services did not prejudice Ms case.