Nash v. Inman

Material Facts:

A minor obtained fancy waistcoats from the plaintiff despite being sufficiently provided with clothing at the time of obtaining the waistcoats. When the minor refused to pay for the waistcoats, the supplier of the waistcoats, herein the plaintiff, brought an action against the minor to recover the costs of the waistcoats.

Issue:

1. Whether or not the goods supplied to the minor constituted necessaries.

2. Whether or not the plaintiff can bring a successful action against the minor for the recovery of the cost of the waistcoats.

Holding:

1. That the goods supplied to the minor were not a necessity.

2. The plaintiff cannot bring an action against the minor for the recovery of the cost of the waistcoats.

Ratio Decidendi:

The court ruled that at the time of the supply, the minor had sufficient clothes and that the fancy waistcoats did not constitute a necessary especially as at the time of delivery of the waistcoats. It was also established that since the defendant is a minor, he had a limited capacity to contract and unless proved that the subject of the contract was a necessity for the child, an action to enforce a contract against a child must fail.