KIEFER v. FRED HOWE MOTORS, INC

,KIEFERv.FREDHOWEMOTORS,INC.SupremeCourtofWisconsin,May7,1968.39Wis.2d20,158N.W.2d288.,1.Facts,2.Issues,Afteracrackedblock,PaskedDtotakethecarbackseveraltimesfailedPsAttorneyPaulC.KonnoradvisePtodeclarethecontractvoidTenderreturnofthecar&askfortherepaymentofthepricePwrotetoDaccordingtotheattorneysadviseNoresponseatall.Pcommencedactiontorecover$412Fortheplaintiff.Dappealed,Facts,Conflictingtestimony：whetherPhadbeenaskedhisage?P&PswifeNoDYesSentenceinthecontract:justabovethepurchaserssignature:“IrepresentthatIam21yearsofageoroverandrecognizethatthedealersellstheabovevehicleuponthisrepresentation.”,Facts,Details,1.Shouldanemancipatedminorover18beresponsibleforhiscontracts?,3.Istheplaintiffliableintortformisrepresentation?,2.Wasthecontracteffectivelydisaffirmed?,Issues,Defendantargues:a)Notanexceptionofthegeneralrule,butasofpublicpolicy“adoptarulethatanemancipatedminorover18yrsoldbemadelegallyresponsibleforhiscontracts.”b)“whethertherehasbeenaneffectivedisaffirmanceofthecontractinthiscase.”c)therespondentshouldbeheldliableintortfordamagesbecausehemisrepresentedhisage.Appellantwouldusethesedamagesasasetoffagainstthecontractpricesoughttobereclaimedbyrespondent.,Facts,Issues,HoldingMinorsrequiresomeprotectionfromthepitfallsofthemarketplace.Onemaydisaffirm/rescindacontractwhileasaminor.Rule“Thecontractofaminor,otherthanfornecessaries,iseithervoidorvoidableathisoption.”Otherexceptionsincludestatuesordutiesimposedbylaw.,Issues,ReasoningEmancipationofa“minor”isnotpartoftheruleoflaw.Originofruleistoprotectminors(infancydoctrine)frominjusticeinthemodernworld,thisseemstolosealittlelustshowsexamplesofbeingabletocarryfirearms,butnotbuythemetc.Legislatureintentjudgeisinterpretingwhatlegislatureintended.GivesthreeexamplesofalawreviewarticleextremelyburdensomeonthecourtifacceptedEventhoughthereissomelogic,hecannotoverrulelegislationandshowthatjustbecauseyouareemancipatedormarrieddisplaysmaturityandwisdomtobelegallyboundtoacontractovertheageof18.,Issues,LegislatureintentThreesolutionsleadtogreaterfreedomofthecontract.,Firstapproach:California&NewYork:submitaproposedcontractacourtfindingthattheparticularcontractisfairremovetheinfantsrightofdisaffirmanceComment:extremelyimpracticalinlightoftheexpensedelaywouldaccompanytheprocedure.,Issues,LegislatureintentThreesolutionsleadtogreaterfreedomofthecontract.,Secondapproach:establisharebuttablepresumptionofincapacitytoreplacethestrictrule.Comment:Thisalternativewouldbeanopeninvitationtolitigation.Thethirdapproach:statutoryprocedureallowingaminortopetitionacourtfortheremovalofdisabilities.Comment:Aminorwouldonlyhavetogotocourtonce,ratherthanonceforeachcontractasinthefirstsuggestion.,Issues,Holding:EstablishaneffectivedisaffirmanceofthecontractRule:“Anyactwhichclearlyshowsanintenttodisaffirmacontractorsaleissufficientforthepurpose.Thusanoticebytheinfantofhispurposetodisaffirmatenderorevenaoffertoreturntheconsiderationoritsproceedstothevendor,issufficient.”(Williston)*Sufficient:infant+intenttodisaffirm+actReasoning:Pstestimony+PsletterSufficientactestablishthattherewasaneffectivedisaffirmanceofthecontract.,Issues,Holding:Therewasnointenttodeceiveandnojustifiablereliance,appellantsactionformisrepresentationmustfail.Rule:ThedefraudingminormaybeallowedtodisaffirmhiscontractbutbeliableintortfordamagesWisconsinLoan&FinanceCorp.v.GoodnoughTorttheoryEstoppeltheory,Issues,RuleApartyallegingfraudhastheburdenofprovingitbyclearandconvincingevidence.Tobeactionablethefalserepresentationmustconsist,*astatementoffactwhichisuntrue*itwasmadewithintenttodefraudandforthepurposeofinducingtheotherpartytoactuponit*hedidinfactrelyonitandwasinducedtherebytoact,tohisinjuryordamage,Issues,ReasoningRemedyagainstthedefraudingminorWisconsinLoan&FinanceCorp.v.GoodnoughThedefendantminorwasaco-partnerinabusinessHedefaultedonanotegiventotheplaintiffinexchangeforaloan.Thedefendanthadsecuredtheloanbyfraudulentlyrepresentingtotheplaintiffthathewastwenty-oneyearsold.Estoppeltheory:fullamountofthenote+interest+attorneysfeeTorttheory:damagessustained,Issues,ReasoningwhethertherequisitesforatortactioninmisrepresentationarepresentConflictingtestimony：whetherPhadbeenaskedhisage?P&PswifeNoDYesSentenceinthecontract:justabovethepurchaserssignature:“IrepresentthatIam21yearsofageoroverandrecognizethatthedealersellstheabovevehicleuponthisrepresentation.”,Issues,ReasoningNoevidenceshowedthattheplaintiffhadanintenttodefraudthedealer.Tothecontrary,majorityofminorsareunawareofthelegalconsequencesoftheiracts.Thereliance=justifiablerelianceDwasntjustifiedinthemererelianceonthesentence.Plaintiffwassufficientlyimmaturelookingtoarousesuspicionbutappellantnevertookanyaffirmativesteps(seeadraftcard,identificationcard,orthemostlogicalindiciumofageunderthecircumstances,adriverslicense.Element*&Element*werentsatisfied.Actionformisrepresentationfailed.,Issues,Firstground:dothprotesttoomuch.Minorsareemancipatedbyavalidmarriageandbyenteringmilitaryservice,thentheyarematureenoughtomakebindingcontractsinthemarketplace.Themagicalagelimitof21yearsasanindicationofcontractualmaturitynolongerhasabasisinfactorinpublicpolicy.Secondground:anautomobiletothisrespondentwasanecessityWhiletherecordshowsthereissomepublictransportationtohispresentplaceofwork,italsoshowsheborrowedhismotherscartogotoandfromwork.thecontractcouldnotbedisaffirmed.,Wasanautomobiletothisrespondentanecessity?,Discussion,Comparativelaw,第五十八条下列民事行为无效：（一）无民事行为能力人实施的；（二）限制民事行为能力人依法不能