# Practical contracting with minors **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 11, 2008, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187 "2008-01-11T21:31:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/1 "2008-01-11T21:31:41Z")
Over in another thread, the topic of minors and contract law came up, and it was suggested that minors can void a contract if they want to, but can also enforce the contracts they’ve entered into if they want to. I was thinking about how there are all kinds of standard agreements that minors often enter into, and about how to structure a contract with a minor so you wouldn’t be screwed. It seems to me that as long as you make your contractual obligations contingent on those of the minor, then you’re in the clear, right? As long as the contract says something like: “Upon completion of the minor’s doing X, he will receive…” then it seems you’d be in the clear. The minor can sue to enforce the contract all he wants, but if he hasn’t done X, then the enforcement doesn’t do anything. A few questions: 1. Does this work? 2. Is this how, say, work contracts with minors are structured? 3. What am I overlooking? ---
**Author:** ![Flander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8c91f0/32.png) [@Flander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flander)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/2 "2008-01-11T21:55:26Z")
IANAL, but it is my understanding that when producing a contract, contractual capacity must be met by both parties. If you contract a minor, he is underage and can void the contract at will. If the minor contracts you, the contract is also voidable because he isn’t competent (not old enough). You also can’t draw a contract that violates other laws (e.g. promise to kill if I give you money) or overwrites requirements for contracts (e.g. promise not to void contract because your a minor). **Gfactor** or some of the MANY law experts will be around soon. YMMV based on your state as well (I live in FL). ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/3 "2008-01-11T22:22:58Z")
I think I understand that. My question is about whether one can get most of the practical benefits of a contract even if the other party can void it at will. For example: I contract with the neighbor kid to mow my lawn. We write it up as “Upon completion of mowing the lawn on this date, neighbor kid will receive $10.” Neighbor kid decides he doesn’t really want to mow the lawn, so I never pay him. No great loss. I’d only be screwed if I paid him $10 on his promise to mow the lawn, right? Or would I be. If he failed to see out the contract, would he have to give back the $10? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/4 "2008-01-11T22:32:54Z")
We talked about some related issues with contracts that might be unenforceable here: [Question for Lawyers - Contract law and Consideration](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=352102) ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/5 "2008-01-11T22:57:25Z")
[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] I think I understand that. My question is about whether one can get most of the practical benefits of a contract even if the other party can void it at will. For example: I contract with the neighbor kid to mow my lawn. We write it up as “Upon completion of mowing the lawn on this date, neighbor kid will receive $10.” Neighbor kid decides he doesn’t really want to mow the lawn, so I never pay him. No great loss. I’d only be screwed if I paid him $10 on his promise to mow the lawn, right? Or would I be. If he failed to see out the contract, would he have to give back the $10? [/QUOTE] You have a neighbor kid that will mow your lawn for 10 bucks? Kids in my neighborhood use 10 dollar bills for tissue when they have colds. (Not really) But, seriously, 10 bucks isn’t anything for a kid today… ---
**Author:** ![PaulParkhead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@PaulParkhead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PaulParkhead)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/6 "2008-01-11T23:12:11Z")
[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] I think I understand that. My question is about whether one can get most of the practical benefits of a contract even if the other party can void it at will. For example: I contract with the neighbor kid to mow my lawn. We write it up as “Upon completion of mowing the lawn on this date, neighbor kid will receive $10.” Neighbor kid decides he doesn’t really want to mow the lawn, so I never pay him. No great loss. I’d only be screwed if I paid him $10 on his promise to mow the lawn, right? Or would I be. If he failed to see out the contract, would he have to give back the $10? [/QUOTE] IANAL, but I loves me a WAG: If you paid him in advance, and he then decides to void the contract, he has to return whatever he gained from you. I base that on comments in the other thread you refer to. What it seems to be is that no, he can’t keep your $10 and run off into the sunset waving digits in the air. If he voids the contract, he absolves both of you of any responsibilities that such contract may contain. What it would mean is that you couldn’t force him to mow your lawn, or sue him for not doing so if he exercises his right to void the contract. In effect, you can’t say “I don’t want my $10 back, I want my lawn mowed!” ---
**Author:** ![Cillasi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@Cillasi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cillasi)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/7 "2008-01-11T23:13:37Z")
Payment is contingent upon services rendered so you wouldn’t be out any money, but suppose the matter was time sensitive and you could lose something else if it wasn’t done (i.e., fined on a violation). You could NOT sue the minor for not mowing your lawn even though you didn’t pay him because contracts with minors are null and void, whereas you could sue an adult for breach of contract and possibly recover the amount of the fine and costs, fees and expenses to expunge the violation. Not all contracts with minors are automatically void. Sales (which are also considered contracts) for a minor’s survival and well-being (i.e., food, clothing, lodging) are enforceable. [QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] I think I understand that. My question is about whether one can get most of the practical benefits of a contract even if the other party can void it at will. For example: I contract with the neighbor kid to mow my lawn. We write it up as “Upon completion of mowing the lawn on this date, neighbor kid will receive $10.” Neighbor kid decides he doesn’t really want to mow the lawn, so I never pay him. No great loss. I’d only be screwed if I paid him $10 on his promise to mow the lawn, right? Or would I be. If he failed to see out the contract, would he have to give back the $10? [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/8 "2008-01-11T23:24:46Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain] You have a neighbor kid that will mow your lawn for 10 bucks? Kids in my neighborhood use 10 dollar bills for tissue when they have colds. (Not really) But, seriously, 10 bucks isn’t anything for a kid today… [/QUOTE] Actually, I don’t have a lawn, either. I’m not sure where that leaves my hypothetical… ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/9 "2008-01-11T23:49:22Z")
[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] Actually, I don’t have a lawn, either. I’m not sure where that leaves my hypothetical… [/QUOTE] Do you even have neighbor kids?!? Wow, the whole example is disappearing into a void… :smack: ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/10 "2008-01-11T23:49:23Z")
[QUOTE=Cillasi] because contracts with minors are null and void [/QUOTE] Voidable by the minor, not void. So if he decides he doesn’t feel like mowing your lawn, he can give back your $10 and you have no recourse. But if you change your mind and tell him not to do it, he can enforce the contract. (Well, actually he can’t in this case because it’s a personal services contract. Say you agreed to pay him $10 for a baseball card instead. He can change his mind about selling, but if he wants to go through with it, you can’t change your mind.) ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2008, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/11 "2008-01-11T23:57:29Z")
[QUOTE=ENugent] Voidable by the minor, not void. So if he decides he doesn’t feel like mowing your lawn, he can give back your $10 and you have no recourse. But if you change your mind and tell him not to do it, he can enforce the contract. (Well, actually he can’t in this case because it’s a personal services contract. Say you agreed to pay him $10 for a baseball card instead. He can change his mind about selling, but if he wants to go through with it, you can’t change your mind.) [/QUOTE] Can you explain the personal services bit? If he shows up to mow my lawn, and I say “nevermind” and he does it anyway, can he not sue for the $10 he contracted for? What if we actually make the baseball card exchange? Can he require that we reverse the exchange at some later time? How much later? These are all hypothetical. There’s no actual child I’m considering doing business with, and I realize that precise answers may vary from state to state. ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/12 "2008-01-12T00:32:45Z")
[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] Can you explain the personal services bit? If he shows up to mow my lawn, and I say “nevermind” and he does it anyway, can he not sue for the $10 he contracted for? . [/QUOTE] As a general matter, contracts for the sales of goods are governed by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) – accepted as law to varying extents state by state\* – which is a set of statutes that supercede any common law in that state regarding contracts dealing in the sames of goods. Sales of services are evaluated under the common law. This means you may get a different result depending on what the contract was for; goods or services. \*Louisiana is the only state that has not adopted any part of the UCC article 9 (“Sales of Goods”). ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/13 "2008-01-12T00:35:18Z")
In the US, you cannot obtain specific performance (insistence that he actually carry out his end, instead of paying damages) for a personal services contract, because it violates the 13th amendment against slavery. You can for certain other kinds of contracts, notably most real estate deals. So you can force someone to go through with selling you his house if he signs the P&S, but you can’t force him to come paint your bathroom. (He also can’t force you to let him paint your bathroom.) I’m not certain of the answer about voiding completed contracts with a minor. I would think it would have to be within a reasonable time, but I don’t know for sure (that bar exam review sure fades away quickly once the exam is over). ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/14 "2008-01-12T14:51:27Z")
[QUOTE=Hello Again] \*Louisiana is the only state that has not adopted any part of the UCC article 9 (“Sales of Goods”). [/QUOTE] Article 9 is secured transactions, Article 2 is sale of goods. [/nitpick] [QUOTE=ENugent] Well, actually he can’t in this case because it’s a personal services contract. [/QUOTE] While it is a personal service contract, only his part is personal services, that’s generally the part that a court won’t order specifically performed. And really there’d be no need for specific performance in that case anyway. It’s a unilateral contract: If you cut my lawn, I’ll pay ten bucks. Kid doesn’t cut lawn; I don’t owe anything–kid cuts lawn, I owe the contract price. If I don’t perform, the kid sues for ten bucks and wins damages. Of course, we could dream up some cases where the line isn’t as clear. This case is especially tricky because the minor’s performance isn’t refundable (how do you give back a cut lawn?) > [@](#): > > I’m not certain of the answer about voiding completed contracts with a minor. I would think it would have to be within a reasonable time, but I don’t know for sure (that bar exam review sure fades away quickly once the exam is over). It gets a bit hairy depending on whether the minor is plaintiff or defendant. > [@](#): > > It has been pointed out that many jurisdictions now require that tn infant who seeks to disaffirm a contract and obtain restitution must return or account for the benefits he has received under the contract. If, however, the infant is a defendant and sets up a defense of infancy the infant is liable only for necessaries or for the value of tangible consideration he still retains. > > In New Hampshire, however the courts have taken the position that it its immaterial whether the infant is the plaintiff or defendant. If the infant has received benefits, whether necessaries or not, he is liable in an action for restitution for the value of the benefits. Calamari & Perillo, \*Contracts \* (3rd ed. 1987) ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/15 "2008-01-12T15:07:33Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] While it is a personal service contract, only his part is personal services, that’s generally the part that a court won’t order specifically performed. And really there’d be no need for specific performance in that case anyway. It’s a unilateral contract: If you cut my lawn, I’ll pay ten bucks. Kid doesn’t cut lawn; I don’t owe anything–kid cuts lawn, I owe the contract price. If I don’t perform, the kid sues for ten bucks and wins damages. [/QUOTE] In fact, the minor probably couldn’t get any sort of equitable remedy to enforce the contract because he has an adequate remedy at law (damages). I just had this issue in a case. My company had issued a documentary draft to a title company for a mortgage closing–eight years ago. The title company had screwed up the closing so we had refused the draft until they fixed their mistake. They did, and our records indicate we sent them a replacement draft. There the trail goes dead. Fast forward eight years: We get sued for breach of contract (which has a six-year statute of limitations) and unjust enrichment (which is an equitable claim that doesn’t have a fixed statute of limitations). The plaintiff’s lawyer did not sue on the draft itself, which was foolish IMO because there’s a ten year statute of limitations on those. I answered, pleading statute of limitations and laches, and then moved for judgment on the pleadings. My opponent dropped his contract claim and tried an end-run based on unjust enrichment, which was a big mistake. You can’t get equitable relief if you had an adequate remedy at law. All of the cases here say that blowing the statute of limitations does not render the legal remedy inadequate. The judge actually decided the case based on laches. I’m just glad I won; it was a $70,000 draft. And though we had notes in an old database that said we sent the draft, the bank didn’t have records from back then that would demonstrate that the title company had cashed it. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/16 "2008-01-12T15:29:18Z")
[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=] Can you explain the personal services bit? If he shows up to mow my lawn, and I say “nevermind” and he does it anyway, can he not sue for the $10 he contracted for? [/QUOTE] This actually has not unique features related to minors. It’s another unilateral contract issue. > [@](#): > > “A unilateral contract is a contract in which performance is based on the wish, will, or pleasure of one of the parties.” Cook v. Coldwell Banker, 967 S.W.2d 654, 657[3] (Mo.App. 1998). The promisor receives no promise in return as consideration for the original promise. Id. at 657[4]. The contractual relationship arises when the conduct of the parties supports a reasonable inference of a mutual understanding that one party perform and the other party compensate for such performance. Commercial Lithographing Co. v. Family Media, Inc., 695 S.W.2d 936, 939[3] (Mo.App. 1985). “An offer to make a unilateral contract is accepted when the requested performance is rendered.” Cook, 967 S.W.2d at 657[6]. The offer cannot be revoked where the offeree has made substantial performance. Id. at 657. [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mo&vol=/appeals/102003/&invol=301028\_2003](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=mo&vol=/appeals/102003/&invol=301028_2003) It gets fun when one party has relied on a unlilateral contract offer (maybe he buys gas for the mower or blows off other customers to do your work) that gets rescinded before the party actually starts performance. Someone in that position can sometimes get reliance damages if their relianace was reasonable. For more fun with unilateral contracts not involving minors, see: [How often do informers collect reward money?](http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mrewards.htm) ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2008, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/practical-contracting-with-minors/433187/17 "2008-01-12T18:12:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Actually, I don’t have a lawn, either. I’m not sure where that leaves my hypothetical… No wonder he only charges you $10.00.