Wallis v. Bardwell

Mar 3, 1879
Reporters:
,
Before:
Colt
Colt, J.

The evidence offered was properly rejected, as immaterial. The rule is, that a ‍​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‍guardian can make no contract binding upon the ward, or upon his estate. The guardian has only the control and management of the ward’s estate, with no title ‍​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‍to it; a power not coupled with an interest. He may make contracts in his own name, but they only bind himself; and the ward does not become ‍​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‍a party to them after the death or discharge of the guardian. Thacher v. Dinsmore, 5 Mass. 299. Hicks v. Chapman, 10 Allen, 463. Simmons v. Almy, 100 Mass. 239.

The plaintiffs bring themselves within no exception to the rule. The ‍​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‍contract here relied on, moreover, is one which, inde*367pendently of the rule, would not be binding on the minors, if made by them; for repairs on a dwelling-house ‍​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​​‌​‌‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‍are not necessar ries in the technical sense of the word. Tupper v. Cadwell, 12 Met. 559.

Exceptions overruled.