Page images
PDF
EPUB

Unborn child.

Persons of unsound mind.

Custody of minors, &c.

Powers of minors.

Contracts of minors.

When minor may

S 12. A child conceived, but not yet born, is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth.

Marsellis v. Thalheimer, 2 Paige, 35; Jenkins v. Freyer, 4 id., 47; Hone v. Van Schaick, 3 Barb. Ch., 488.

$13. Persons of unsound mind, within the meaning of this CODE, are idiots, lunatics, imbeciles and habitual drunkards.

S 14. The custody of minors and persons of unsound mind is regulated by Part III of this Division.

$ 15. A minor cannot give a delegation of power.

Bennet v. Davis, 6 Cow., 393. Such a delegation is not merely voidable, but absolutely void (See Bool v. Mix, 17 Wend., 119). The propriety of this rule has, however, been seriously doubted (Whitney v. Dutch, 14 Mass., 462).

S 16. A minor may make a conveyance or other contract in the same manner as any other person, subject only to his power of disaffirmance' under the provisions of this Title, and to the provisions of the Title on MARRIAGE.

1 Palmer v. Miller, 25 Barb., 399; Slocum v. Hooker, 13 Barb,, 536; Bool v. Mix, 17 Wend., 119; Gillett v. Stanley, 1 Hill, 121; Van Nostrand v. Wright, Hill & D. Supp., 260; Clark v. Levi, 10 N. Y. Leg. Obs., 184. It has been doubted whether a minor who has a guardian, can make a contract (Stafford v. Roof, 9 Cow., 626, 630; Kline v. L'Amoureux, 2 Paige, 419); but it seems now to be settled that he can (Bartholemew v. Finnemore, 17 Barb., 428).

.

17. In all cases' other than those specified by disaflirm. sections 18 and 19, the contract of a minor may, upon restoring the consideration2 to the party from whom it was received, be disaffirmed by the minor himself, either before his majority, or within a reasonable time afterwards, or, in case of his death

within that period, by his heirs or personal represen-
tatives.5

1 Conroe v. Birdsall, 1 Johns. Cas., 127; Brown v. M'Cune,
5 Sandf., 224; Merriam v. Cunningham, 11 Cush-
ing, 40.

[blocks in formation]

$ 18. A minor, or a person of unsound mind of whatever degree,' cannot disaffirm a contract, other wise valid, to pay the reasonable value of things necessary for his support, or for that of his family,3 entered into by him when not under the care of a parent or guardian3 able to provide for him.

1 Ingraham v. Baldwin, 9 N. Y., 45.

Smith v. Oliphant, 2 Sandf., 306; Randall v. Sweet, 1

Den., 460.

Turner v. Frisby, Strange, 168.

4 Wailing v. Toll, 9 Johns., 141.

Kline v. L'Amoureux, 2 Paige, 419.

Cannot

disaffirm

contract for

necessaries.

obligations.

$ 19. A minor cannot disaffirm an obligation, Nor certain otherwise valid, entered into by him under the express authority or direction of a statute.

This is intended to provide for such cases as the execu-
tion of a bond in bastardy proceedings, or a voluntary
assignment under the statute relating to the imprison-
ment of insolvent debtors, or an enlistment, or articles
of apprenticeship.

of persons understand

S20. A person entirely without understanding has Contracts no power to contract, except in the case mentioned in section 18, unless expressly authorized by statute.

See Jackson v. King, 4 Cow., 207.

without ing.

of other

persons.

S21. A person of unsound mind, but not entirely Contracts without understanding, may make a conveyance or insane other contract, before his incapacity has been judicially determined, subject to rescission, as provided in the chapter on RESCISSION.

Powers of persons whose incapacity has been adjudged.

Wrongs.

Id.

Mirors may enforce

Jackson v. King, 4 Cow., 207; Person v. Warren, 14
Barb., 488; Odell v. Buck, 21 Wend., 142. Thus a
mortgage by a lunatic is at most voidable (Ingraham
v. Baldwin, 9 N. Y., 45; 12 Barb., 9). The mere ex-
istence of lunacy does not revoke a power (Wallis v. .
Manhattan Co., 2 Hall, 495). Compare, however, the
proposed change in the law of Agency. As to the cases
in which such a contract should be set aside, see
Sprague v. Duel (11 Paige, 480); Loomis v. Spencer (2
id., 153).

$ 22. After his incapacity has been judicially determined, a person of unsound mind can make no conveyance or other contract, nor delegate any power, nor waive any right, until his restoration to capacity is judicially determined. But if actually restored to capacity, he may make a will, though his restoration is not thus determined.

See 1 R. S., 719, § 10; Fitzhugh v. Wilcox, 12 Barb..

235.

$23. A minor,' or a person of unsound mind, of whatever degree,' is liable for a wrong done by him, in like manner with any other person.

'Fish v. Ferris, 5 Duer, 49; Campbell v. Stakes, 2 Wend., 139; Hartfield v. Roper, 21 id., 615; Green v. Burke, 23 id., 490; Bullock v. Babcock, 3 id., 391; Wallace

v. Morss, 5 Hill, 391; Conklin v. Thompson, 29 Barb., 218; Burnard v. Haggis, 14 C. B. [N. S.], 45. Krom v. Schoonmaker, 3 Barb., 647; see Williams v. Cameron, 26 id., 172.

$24. A minor, or person of unsound mind, cannot be subjected to exemplary damages, unless at the time of the act he was capable of knowing that it was wrongful.

Krom v. Schoonmaker, 3 Barb. 647.

S25. A minor may enforce his rights by civil action, their rights, or other legal proceedings, in the same manner as a person of full age, except that a guardian must be appointed to conduct the same.

2 R. S., 445, 1.

$26. Indians resident within this state have the Indians. same rights and duties as other persons; except that:

1. They cannot vote or hold office; and that,

2. They cannot grant, lease, or incumber Indian lands, except in the cases provided by special laws.'

'The course of legislation and of decision, following the

modifications which time has made in the actual con-
dition of the Indians, is such that, by the act of 1843,
Indians are authorized to purchase, hold and convey
lands; and such as become freeholders to the value
of $100, are liable on contracts and to taxation and
the jurisdiction of the courts, as if citizens. There
seems to be no sufficient reason why a simple gene-
ral provision like that here proposed, should not now
be adopted.

Lee v. Glover, 8 Cow., 189; St. Regis Indians v. Drum,
19 Johns., 127; Jackson v. Wood, 7 id., 290; Chan-
dler v. Edson, 9 id., 362.

« EelmineJätka »