Tupp v. Pederson
ANDREW TUPP v. C. B. PEDERSON
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
This action is upon a promissory note. The defense was that defendant executed the note when only 20 years of age. It appears from the record that the action was commenced nearly six years after defendant became of age, and that defendant never did anything after becoming of age to disaffirm the contract. Appellant claims that the minor, within a reasonable time after becoming of age,' should have disaffirmed the contract, and, if he did not so dis-affirm by some specific act, he ratified by implication. The question here involved is controlled by the decision in the case of Nichols & Shepard Co. v. Snyder, supra, page 502.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 0 cases
No case in this database cites this case.