Holmes v. Rice
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Ingham. Trover by Sarah A. Holmes, against Rice and Dayton for the conversion' of a fanning mill. Defendants pleaded in justification a judgment in favor of Rice against Lorenzo Holmes, the plaintiff’s husband, and a seizure of the property by Dayton, as constable, to satisfy the execution.
Read the full summary
Error to Ingham. Trover by Sarah A. Holmes, against Rice and Dayton for the conversion' of a fanning mill. Defendants pleaded in justification a judgment in favor of Rice against Lorenzo Holmes, the plaintiff’s husband, and a seizure of the property by Dayton, as constable, to satisfy the execution. Plaintiff showed that the mill belonged to her minor daughter, Ella M. Parks, whose guardian she was, and who had executed to her a bill of sale of it, before suit was brought, and had also assigned her right of action. The bill of sale and assignment were excluded from evidence on objection'that…
1Opinion of the CourtMarston, C. J.
The law in recognizing the incapacity of infants to enter into certain contracts and declaring such contracts voidable does so for the infant’s protection. Their contracts are not void but voidable, and it is for the infant to avoid the contract or ratify it, and not within the power of a stranger — certainly not of a wrong-doer — to set up the infant’s incapacity to contract as a protection to himself. The contract, though voidable at the option of the infant, is *143valid as to third parties who are strangers to both parties to the contract, and not claiming under either.
The judgment must be…
2Cited by8 opinions
- I. C. v. StockX, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2021
- Woodman v. Kera LLCMichigan Supreme Court · 2010
- Parks v. LYONSSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951
- National Fuel Co. v. GreenSupreme Court of Colorado · 1911
- Hammassapoulo v. HammassapouloSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.