Question: 1 What was the issue in this case 2 Distinguish the

1. What was the issue in this case?
2. Distinguish the two minority rules that are summarized in this case.
3. To achieve justice in contract cases involving a minor and an adult, what would you want to know about the adult’s behavior toward the minor?
4. White, a 17-year-old high school sophomore, operated a trucking business, including hiring drivers, securing jobs, and so forth. He lived with his parents and received his food, clothing, and shelter from them. Valencia operated a garage and repaired White’s equipment until they had a disagreement over replacement of a motor. White then disaffirmed his contract with Valencia and refused to pay what he owed. At trial the jury found that White had caused the damage to the motor, but the court held that White could disaffirm the contract and required Valencia to refund any money paid to White under the contract. Valencia appealed.
a. Is the fact that White was in business for himself in any way relevant to the outcome of this case? Explain.
b. Decide the case. Explain.
In early April of 1987, Joseph Eugene Dodson, then 16 years of age, purchased a used 1984 pickup truck from Burns and Mary Shrader. The Shraders owned and operated Shrader’s Auto Sales in Columbia, Tennessee. Dodson paid $4,900 in cash for the truck, using money he borrowed from his girlfriend’s grandmother. At the time of the purchase there was no inquiry by the Shraders, and no misrepresentation by Dodson, concerning his minority. However, Shrader did testify that at the time he believed Dodson to be 18 or 19 years of age.

View Solution:

Sale on SolutionInn
  • CreatedOctober 02, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question