GROUP 4 GASTONIA V ROGERS Hannah Jon Liz

GROUP 4 GASTONIA V. ROGERS Hannah, Jon, Liz, Recha, Osman, Jordon & Eli

CONTRACTUAL CAPACITY Please turn to Chapter 14. Page 274. Question 20 o Rogers was a nineteen-year-old (the age of majority then being twentyone) high school graduate pursuing a civil engineering degree when he learned that his wife was expecting a child. As a result, he quit school and sought assistance from Gastonia Personnel Corporation in finding a job. Rogers signed a contract with the employment agency providing that he would pay the agency a service charge if it obtained suitable employment for him. The employment agency found him such a job, but Rogers refused to pay the service charge, asserting that he was a minor when he signed the contract. Gastonia sued to recover the agreed-upon service charge from Rogers. Should Rogers be liable under his contract? If so, for how much?

Factual Overview Rogers • Graduated from high school 1966 • Two self-made unsuccessful interviews • Spratt-Seaver Inc. hired Rogers through Gastonia Personnel Corp. • Lower Court judgment in favor of defendant - reversed June 6, 1968 Date May 29, 1968 Date Rogers • 19 years old – INFANT under law • Legally emancipated • Married with unborn child • Gastonia files a claim against Rogers for the sum of $295 • Sought employment assistance through Gastonia Personnel Corp. • Signed service contract: Fee of $295 Date • Judgment in favor of Plaintiff

Vocabulary Minor Known as an infant, is a person who has not attained the age of legal majority Disaffirmance Release the minor from any liability on the contract Ratification Confirm a contract Related to Legal Concept

A MINOR? An infant, is a person who has not attained the age of legal majority. PRO TANTO? Latin word for only to that extent DISAFFIRMANCE? Q&A Release the minor from any liability on the contract CONFIRMATION The act of

Facts June 6, 1968 • Spratt-Seaver Inc. hired Rogers through Gastonia Personnel Corp. EMPLOYMENT FOUND THROUGH Gastonia CONTRACT Any offer initiated by an employer as a result of Gastonia Personnel Corp. at any time within 12 months of the lead Rogers will be obligated to pay a flat rate of $295. Rogers None

Issues Married: Has to pay for “necessities” for his wife and child Rogers: Married and Emancipated: Has ability to pay the service charge ($250) 19 years old: Infant under the law Common law Classified and referred to as infants until they attain the age of 21 years

Date Legal Concept • Gastonia files a claim against Rogers for the sum of $295 Minor: Liability for necessaries @ Common Law: • Minor was an individual who had not reached the age of 21 • However, today the age of majority is changed to age eighteen contracts is voidable at his guardian’s option. • Emancipated minor no longer under parental control and may or may not avoid contractual liability. Liability on contracts • A minor may disaffirm a contract at any time before reaching the age of majority. • A minor has the option to ratifying a contract after reaching the age of majority. • Minor has to pay for his necessities that suitably and reasonably supply his personal needs. • However, the minor is not contractually liable for the agreed price but for the reasonable value of the items furnished.

Legal Concept Date • Gastonia files a claim against Rogers for the sum of $295 In our case… Rogers is an emancipated minor who is married and going to have a child Plaintiff No longer under parental control but still may avoid contractual liability in most jurisdictions. Defendant Has to pay for his necessities that supply needs above his own. Court To determine if Rogers could relinquish the $295, pay in full or pay a partial sum.

Implication What if? Plaintiff (Gastonia) Showed evidence the contract was an appropriate and reasonable means for defendant to obtain suitable employment Defendant (Rogers) Refused service to Rogers because of infancy or made contract based upon knowledge of infancy Brought evidence of emancipation when applying for employment to prove his abilities to provide quality work

Date Consequence s • Judgment in favor of Plaintiff Need: Case consequences of Gastonia V Rogers Case consequences of SIMILAR CASES

POINTS OF VIEW PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT Defendant Plaintiff POLITICAL ECONOMIC If all unemployed emancipated infants decided to apply for career positions through Gastonia Personnel Corp. and refused to pay their duties, there would be economic losses. Gastonia would not receive pay for the services they perform. BUT, being a financially fiscal company could forgo the fees from infants as a duty of good will and receive consideration through PR press. Government emancipation could be a massive issue country wide. Infants could all apply for emancipation and sign whichever contracts they wanted, and plead legal infancy and disregard anything they have been previously bound to. MORAL Rogers should be forced to pay the fee to which he contractually agreed to although he is an “infant” by legal standards. He signed a contract as a legally emancipated individual. BUT, he is still a young adult with the pressures of a newly married wife and child on the way, which could force him to agree to a contract to which he does not honestly consent to.