Halbman v. Lemke
Supreme Court of
99 Wis.2d 241, 298 N.W.2d
562.
Facts: Halbman contracted to buy a car from Lemke while
Halbman was still a minor. Before he had
paid off the car, it broke down and he took it in to be repaired. He didn’t pay the repair bill. Lemke then endorsed the title to Halbman to
try to avoid liability for repairs.
Halbman returned the title and disaffirmed the contract. Halbman wanted all the money back that he had
paid so far. The car stayed at the
garage for a few months, then it was towed back to the Halbmans’ house where it
was vandalized beyond repair. Halbman
sued for $1,100, the amount he had paid under the disaffirmed contract, and
Lemke countersued for $150, the amount unpaid on the contract.
Issue: After having disaffirmed a contract for the purchase
of an item that isn’t a necessity, does Halbman have to make restitution to
Lemke for damage to the vehicle that occurred before the contract was
disaffirmed?
Rule: When a minor disaffirms a contract, the minor has the
duty to return to the vendor as much of the consideration for the contract that
he still has.
Analysis: The court basically says that Halbman can’t be forced
to return something that he doesn’t have anymore.
Conclusion: The intermediate appellate court’s decision is affirmed.