Bowling V Sperry

416 Words2 Pages
Danielle Scheffel Case Brief Summary 1/28/2015 Bowling v Sperry 22 Ill.133 Ind. App. 692, 184 N.E.29 901 (Ct. App. 1962) Plaintiff, Larry Bowling, a minor, joined into an agreement with the Defendant, Max E. Sperry d/b/a Sperry Ford Sales to purchase a 1947 Plymouth automobile. The plaintiff bought the automobile from the defendant for the sale price of $140.00. The plaintiff paid a $50.00 deposit and the paid the remaining balance when the automobile was picked up for purchase. At the time he took ownership of the car, his aunt and grandmother accompanied him to the dealership. The purchase was completed in his name and it was known that he was the buyer of the car. A week after the automobile was purchased, it was revealed that the main bearing had burned out. The plaintiff tried to return the car. The defendant refused to return his money and suit followed. At the trial, the Court dismissed the case, due to the fact that the plaintiff had borrowed money from his aunt and was accompanied by her to the dealership when he took ownership of the car. The plaintiff appealed. The issue with this case questions whether a contract is enforceable when it is entered into by a minor. With certain exceptions, contracts entered into by minors are voidable and can be withdrawn. The court ruled that the facts that the minor was accompanied by his relatives and received a loan from an aunt did not change the rule. As the agreement and sale was concerned, the court ruled, there was sufficient evidence to show that it was made between the dealership and the minor and no one else. Piano Co. v Davy 68 Ind. App. 150, 119 N.E. 177 (1918). Appellee was fully aware of Larry’s age when the sale was negotiated. The written receipt was in Larry’s name alone. This contract was squarely between and adult and falls within the rules pronounced above. Furthermore, the court ruled, the

More about Bowling V Sperry

Open Document