Myers v. Hurley Motor Co., 273 U.S. 18 (1927)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 273 U.S. 12, click here.

Myers v. Hurley Motor Company

No. 5

Argued December 9, 1926
Decided January 3, 1927
273 U.S. 18

CERTIFICATE FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Syllabus

1. The fact that a contract made in infancy was induced by the infant’s fraudulent misrepresentation of his age does not estop him from disaffirming the contract and maintaining his action to recover money paid under it. Sims v. Everhardt, 102 U.S. 300. P. 22.

2. But where the action is for money had and received, equitable principles apply defensively, and by way of recoupment, to prevent a recovery of that to which the plaintiff is not in equity and good conscience entitled. P. 23.

3. The infant, representing himself as of age, bought and obtained possession of an automobile upon conditional sale, but paid only part of the price. The vendor took back the car. In an action by the vendee, who disaffirmed upon reaching his majority, the vendor was equitably entitled to recoup from the amount which the vendee had paid the amount which the vendor was required to expend to put the car in as good condition as it was when so sold and delivered. P. 27.

Response to questions certified by the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia on appeal from a judgment recovered on a counterclaim by the motor company in an action by Myers to recover money and money’s worth paid in infancy on the purchase of an automobile.