Boynton v. Clay

58 Me. 236
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 1, 1870
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 58 Me. 236 (Boynton v. Clay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Boynton v. Clay, 58 Me. 236 (Me. 1870).

Opinion

Appbeton, C. J.

A minor, by the consent of his father, may go out to service and receive his earnings. He may maintain an action, for the value of his labor, against the person employing him, either upon the express contract when there is one, or upon an implied contract. Corey v. Corey, 19 Pick. 29; Bubier v. Bubier, 39 Maine, [238]*238406; Burlingame v. Burlingame, 7 Cow. 92. “We go so far as to say,” observes Parker, C. J., in Whitney v. Earle, 3 Pick. 201, “ that when a minor son makes a contract for his services, on his own account, and the father knows it and makes no objection, there is an implied assent that the son shall have his earnings.”

Here the defendant contracted with the minor. The father having deceased, the mother can have no greater rights than he had, whatever hers may be. The mother has in no way interfered adversely to her son; but, on the contrary, she appears in court as his next friend to aid in the prosecution of his claim, and, therefore, her assent, if it was necessary to have it, may well be inferred.

Exceptions sustained.

Cutting, Kent, Dickerson, Barrows, and Tapley, JJ., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lottinville v. Dwyer
27 A.2d 305 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1942)
Whitehead v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
22 Mo. App. 60 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 Me. 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boynton-v-clay-me-1870.