Riley v. Mallory
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit for money had and received, appealed from a justice of the peace, and tried to the jury in the superior court, on the general issue with notice, before Pardee, J. The plaintiff was a minor.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money had and received, appealed from a justice of the peace, and tried to the jury in the superior court, on the general issue with notice, before Pardee, J. The plaintiff was a minor. On the trial he claimed, and offered evidence to prove, that in August, 1863, he purchased a gun of the defendant, and paid therefor the agreed price of five dollars; that on or about the twenty-fifth of September, 1863, having determined to rescind the contract of purchase, he notified the defendant that he rescinded the contract, tendered back the gun to him in as good condition as when he took…
1Opinion of the CourtButler, J.
The claims urged by the defendant in this case can not be sustained. It is apparent that he has been misled by hasty text writers who did not fully comprehend the true principles and condition of the law relating to infancy.
The privilege of an infant to avoid contracts which are injurious to him, and rescind those which are not, is not an exception to a general rule, but a general rule with exceptions. The law assumes the incapacity of an infant to contract. It also recognizes the fact that the limitation of infancy is arbitrary ; that it is indispensably necessary that an infant should be at…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Roosevelt v. Heirs of FultonNew York Supreme Court · 1827
3Cited by15 opinions
- Coburn v. RaymondSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
- Creer v. Active Auto Exchange, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Hall v. ButterfieldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1879
- Shutter v. FudgeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Ex parte McFerrenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1913
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.