Carmody v. Patchell
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Carmody v. Patchell, 42 App. D.C. 426 (D.C. 1914)
1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2305
Bobb
Carmody v. Patchell
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Court:
The first question presented by the assignments of error, namely, whether a minor may repudiate such a contract as is here involved during his minority, need not be determined, for the reason that before trial in the present case the plaintiff attained and suggested his majority, and evinced his desire to repudiate the contract by obtaining leave to prosecute the suit in his own name. Stater v. Rudderforth, 25 App. D. C. 497.
The second question raised, namely, whether, after repudiation of such a contract, money paid thereon may be recovered, likewise has been determined adversely to the defendant’s contentions. Gannon v. Manning, ante, 206.
The judgment, therefore, must be affirmed with costs.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- CARMODY v. PATCHELL
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Infants; Contracts; Repudiation. 1. A sufficient repudiation of an infant’s contract occurs when, an action to that end having been brought in his favor during his infancy, he obtains leave to prosecute the suit in his own name on reaching his majority. (Following Slater v. Rudderforth, 25 App. D. C. 497.) 2. Money paid by an infant on a contract may be recovered by him after his repudiation of the contract on reaching his majority. (Following Gannon v. Manning, ante, 206.)