Adults, who are. 27. Status of minors, how changed. Unborn child. Persons made other States, considered as such in this State, when domiciled herein. Minors by the laws of All other persons are adults. 28. The marriage of minors changes their status from minors to adults. NOTE.-Stats. 1858, p. 108. The statute embraced only females; this section extends the privilege to males. 29. A child conceived, but not yet born, is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth. NOTE.-Cool. Bl. Comm., I, p. 128; Marsellis vs. Thalheimer, 2 Paige, p. 35; Jenkins vs. Freyer, 4 Paige, p. 47; Hone vs. Van Scharck, 3 Barb., Chap. 488. 30. Persons made adults by the laws of a State or foreign country in which they were domiciled, are adults in this State when they become domiciled herein. NOTE.-Story on Conflict of Laws, p. 52; Tyler on Infancy and Coverture, p. 35. 31. Minors by the laws of another State or foreign other State country, wherein they have been domiciled, are not deemed adults under this Code so as to affect or alter their rights in relation to contracts made in such State or foreign country. or country, how considered in this State. Custody of minors. Minors cannot give a delegation of power. Contracts of minors made: disaffirmed NOTE.-Story on Conflict of Laws, p. 69; 2 Kent, p. 234, note C. 32. The custody of minors and persons of unsound mind is regulated by Part III of this Division. 33. A minor cannot give a delegation of power. NOTE.-Bennett vs. Davis, 6 Cow., p. 393; Thomas vs. Roberts, 16 M. & W., p. 778. Such a delegation is absolutely void.-Bool vs. Mix, 17 Wend., p. 119; Lawrence vs. McAoter, 10 Ohio, p. 37; Pyle vs. Cravens, 4 Little, p. 17. 34. A minor may make a conveyance or other contract in the same manner as any other person, subject only to his power of disaffirmance under the provis ions of this Title, and to the provisions of the Title on Marriage. NOTE.-Magee vs. Walsh, 18 Cal., p. 155. A minor may make a promissory note, and as to him the note will not be void, but merely voidable at his election.Hastings vs. Dollarhide, 24 Cal., p. 195; Palmer vs. Miller, 25 Barb., p. 399; Slocum vs. Hooker, 13 Barb., p. 536; Bool vs. Mix, 17 Wend., p. 119; Gillett vs. Stanley, 1 Hill, p. 121; Van Nostrand vs. Wright, Hill & D. Supp., p. 260; Clark vs. Levi, 10 N. Y. Leg. Obs,, p. 184. It has been doubted whether a minor who has a guardian can make a contract.-Stafford vs. Roof, 9 Cow., pp. 626, 630; Kline vs. L'Amoreux, 2 Paige, p. 419; but it seems now to be settled that he can.-Bartholomew vs. Finnemore, 17 Barb., p. 428. A confession of judgment by an infant is void.-Saunderson vs. Marr, 1 H. Black, p. 75; Bennett vs. Davis, 6 Cowen, p. 394; Waples vs. Hastings, 3 Harring. (Del.), p. 403; Knox vs. Flack, 22 Penn. St., p. 337. So too is his cognovit for the same purpose, although the action was wholly for necessaries.-Oliver vs. Woodruffe, 4 M. & W., p. 650; or his bond with a penalty, or for the payment of interest.-Baylis vs. Dinely, 3 M. & Sel., p. 477; Hunter vs. Agnew, 1 Fox & S., p. 15; Colcock vs. Ferguson, 3 Desaus., p. 482; or a release by a female infant to a guardian.-Fridge vs. The State, 3 G. & J., p. 104; or an infant's contract of suretyship.-Wheaton vs. East, 5 Yerg., pp. 41-61; Allen vs. Minor, 2 Cal., p. 70. Per contra, Hinely vs. Margaritz, 3 Burr, p. 428; or his release of a legacy or distributive share in an estate.-Langford vs. Fry, 8 Humph, p. 443. 35. In all cases other than those specified by Sections 36 and 37, the contract of a minor may, upon restoring the consideration to the party from whom it was received, be disaffirmed by the minor himself, either before his majority or within a reasonable time afterwards, or, in case of his death within that period, by his heirs or personal representatives. NOTE.-Conroe vs. Birdsall, 1 Johns. Cas., p. 127; Brown vs. McCune, 5 Sandf., p. 224; Merriam vs. Cunningham, 11 Cushing, p. 40; Bartholomew vs. Finnemore, 17 Barb., p. 428; Tafft vs. Sergeant, 18 Barb., p. 320; Bac. Abr., Infant, I, p. 6; 8 Co., 42 b. An infant grantor can neither affirm nor disaffirm a conveyance Cannot disaflirm necessaries 36. of land made during non-age until he attains the age of legal majority.-Hastings vs. Dollarhide, 24 Cal., p. 195. What amounts to a disaffirmance.-Id. Conveyance, once ratified, cannot be disaffirmed.-Id. Ratification may be express or by implication.-Id. The doctrine of estoppel has no application to infants.Lackman vs. Wood, 25 Cal., p. 147; Mahoney vs. Van Winkle, 21 Cal., p. 552. Judgments against minorsJoyce vs. Joyce, 5 Cal., p. 161; Regla vs. Martin, 19 Cal., p. 463; Joyce vs. McAvoy, 31 Cal., p. 273. A minor, or a person of unsound mind of whatcontract for ever degree, cannot disaffirm a contract, otherwise valid, to pay the reasonable value of things necessary for his support, or for that of his family, entered into by him when not under the care of a parent or guardian able to provide for him. Nor certain obligations. Contracts of persons without understanding. Contracts of other insane persons. NOTE.-Ingraham vs. Baldwin, 9 N. Y., p. 45; Smith vs. Oliphant, 2 Sandf., p. 306; Randall vs. .Sweet, 1 Den., p. 460; Turner vs. Frisby, Strange, p. 168; Wailing vs. Toll, 9 Johns., p. 141; Kline vs. L'Amoureux, 2 Paige, p. 418; Bent vs. Manning, 10 Vt., p. 225; Beeler vs. Young, 1 Bibb., p. 519; Grace vs. Hale, 2 Humph., p. 27; Stanton vs. Wilson, 3 Day, p. 37; Phelps vs. Worcester, 11 N. H., p. 51; Tupper vs. Caldwell, 12 Met., p. 559. 37. A minor cannot disaffirm an obligation, otherwise valid, entered into by him under the express authority or direction of a statute. 38. A person entirely without understanding has no power to contract, except in the case mentioned in Section 36, unless expressly authorized by statute. NOTE.-Jackson vs. King, 4 Cow., p. 207; 1 Parson on Contracts, p. 383. 39. A person of unsound mind, but not entirely without understanding, may make a conveyance or other contract before his incapacity has been judicially determined, subject to recision, as provided in the Chapter on Recision. 39 NOTE.-Jackson vs. King, 4 Cow., p. 207; Person vs. Warren, 14 Barb., p. 488; Odell vs. Buck, 21 Wend., p. 142. Thus a mortgage by a lunatic is at most void- 40. After his incapacity has been judicially determined, a person of unsound mind can make no convey ance or other contract, nor delegate any power, nor waive any right, until his restoration to capacity is judicially determined. But if actually restored to capacity, he may make a will, though his restoration is not thus determined. NOTE.-Fitzhugh vs. Wilcox, 12 Barb., p. 235; 41. A minor, or person of unsound mind, of whatever degree, is civilly liable for a wrong done by him, but is not liable in exemplary damages unless at the time of the act he was capable of knowing that it was wrongful. NOTE.-Fish vs. Ferris, 5 Duer, p. 49; Campbell vs Stakes, 2 Wend., p. 139; Hartfield vs. Roper, 21 id., p 615; Green vs. Burke, 23 id., p. 490; Bullock vs. Bab cock, 3 id., p. 391; Wallace vs. Morss, 5 Hill, p. 391 Conklin vs. Thompson, 29 Barb., p. 218; Burnard vs. Haggis, 14 C. B. (N. S.,) p. 45; Krom vs. Schoonmaker, 3 Barb., p. 647; see Williams vs. Cameron, 26 id., p. 172. 42. A minor may enforce his rights by civil action, or other legal proceedings, in the same manner as a person of full age, except that a guardian must conduct the same. |