Porter v. Wilson
| Decision Date | 30 April 1965 |
| Citation | 209 A.2d 730,106 N.H. 270 |
| Parties | , 13 A.L.R.3d 1247 Arthur E. PORTER v. Roy C. WILSON, Jr. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Arthur E. Porter, pro se.
Griffin, Harrington, Brigham & Taylor, Portsmouth (Lindsey R. Brigham, Portsmouth, orally), for the defendant.
A stranger must think it strange that a minor in certain cases may be liable for his torts and responsible for his crimes and yet is not bound by his contracts. Stearns v. Wallace, 59 N.H. 595; Smith v. Bailey, 91 N.H. 507, 23 A.2d 363; Cnaeps v. Brown, 101 N.H. 116, 135 A.2d 721. Of course there are exceptions and qualifications to this general proposition. However, the common-law conception that a minor does not possess the discretion and experience of adults and therefore must be protected from his own contractual follies generally holds sway today. Selected Essays on Family Law, Part III, s. 7 (Ass'n of American Law Schools 1950); Prosser, Torts, s. 128 (3d ed. 1964). 'The special protection traditionally accorded the minor by the Anglo-American legal system has resulted in serious inconvenience and uncertainty to all who deal with them.' Note, Statutory Problems in the Law of Minors' Contracts, 48 Colum.L.Rev. 272 (1948).
The right of a minor to disaffirm his contract on reaching his majority is well recognized in this jurisdiction (Wooldridge v. Lavoie, 79 N.H. 21, 104 A. 346; Stack v. Cavanaugh, 67 N.H. 149, 30 A. 350) but the rule has not been applied indiscriminately to all contracts under all situations. Thus in Hall v. Butterfield, 59 N.H. 354, it was held that the minor was required to pay the value of any benefit derived by him under the contract. The common-law rule that a minor was liable for necessaries was thus extended to require the minor to make restitution to the extent that he received a benefit under the contract. Hall v. Butterfield, supra, 359.
Admittedly the benefit rule represents a minority doctrine but it has received approval of those who have given the matter serious consideration. 2 Williston on Contracts (3d ed. Jaeger 1959) s. 238, p. 43. Another commentator has suggested that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Benoit
...has recognized the common-sense fact that a child does not possess the discretion and experience of an adult, Porter v. Wilson, 106 N.H. 270, 271, 209 A.2d 730, 731 (1965), and that special procedures are required to protect juveniles, who possess immature judgment. State v. Lemelin, 101 N.......
-
Statler v. Dodson
...were adverse). Other courts have implied a contract when the infant benefits from the legal services performed. See Porter v. Wilson, 106 N.H. 270, 209 A.2d 730 (1965) (advancing "from the concept of necessaries to the concept that an infant is liable to make restitution for the benefit he ......
-
Halbman v. Lemke, 79-029
...minor to pay for the contract to the extent he benefited from it. Hall v. Butterfield, 59 N.H. 354 (1879); Porter v. Wilson, 106 N.H. 270, 209 A.2d 730 (1965). See also : 19 Hastings L.J. 1199, 1205-08 (1968); 52 Marq.L.Rev. 437 (1969); Calamari and Perillo, The Law of Contracts, secs. 129,......
-
Dodson by Dodson v. Shrader
...Co., 56 Minn. 365, 59 N.W. 992 (1894); Berglund v. American Multigraph Sales Co., 135 Minn. 67, 160 N.W. 191 (1916); Porter v. Wilson, 106 N.H. 270, 209 A.2d 730 (1965); Valencia v. White, 134 Ariz. 139, 654 P.2d 287 (Ariz.App.1982). The rule holds that, upon rescission, recovery of the ful......
-
Turning girls into women: re-evaluating modern statutory rape law.
...to enjoin the future use of the photos; the court denied relief). (168) Henry v. Root, 33 N.Y. 526, 536 (1865). (169) Porter v. Wilson, 209 A.2d 730, 731 (N.H. 1965). (170) See Farnsworth, supra note 163, at 228 ("[T]he law has tenaciously adhered to an arbitrary standard-the attainment of ......
-
THE MARKET AS NEGOTIATION.
...contracts voidable "until the beginning of the day before the person's eighteenth birthday"). (193) See, e.g., Porter v. Wilson, 209 A.2d 730, 731 (N.H. 1965) (citing to "the common-law conception that a minor does not possess the discretion and experience of adults"); Henry v. Root, 33 N.Y......